.v*** 


n-.  .. 


2- 
t    H    E 

APPEAL  DEFENDED: 

O  R,    T  H  E 

PROPOSED  AMERICAN  EPISCOPATE 

VlNDieATEDn 

li*    ANSWER    TO 

•THE 

Objections  and  misrepresentations 

O    F 
Dr.  CHAUNCt  and  OTHERS. 


By  THOMAS  BRADBURY  CHANDLER,  D.D. 

There  are  fome  Spirits  in  the  World,  who,  unlefs  they  arc  in  aftual 
Pofieffion  of  Defpotilm  themfelves,  are  daily  haunted  with  the  Appre- 
henfion  of  being  fubjecl  to  it  in  others ;  and  who  feem  to  Ipeak  and 
aa  under  the  ftrange  Perfuanon,  that  every  Thing  ftort  of  Perfecu- 
tion  againil  what   they  dillike,  muft  terminate  in  the  Perfecution  of 

^"^  ^    ^  '  Lett,  to  the  Author  of  the  Confejfionah 


JSf   E    H^  '    T   0    R    K: 

.Printed  by  HUGH  GAINE,  at  the  Bible  and  Crown, 
in  Hanover-Square,  1769. 


««  MMHE  Chutch  Of  England  is,  in  its  Conftltution,  Ipiftopal.  Iti»,  In  fome  Plantations,  cofi* 
I  feffedly  the  eftablifhed  Church ;  in  the  reft  are  many  Congregations  adhering  to  it ;  andE 
^  through  the  late  Extention  of  the  Britifli  Dominions,  and  the  Influence  of  other  Caufes, 
it  is  likely  that  there  will  be  more.  All  Members  of  every  Church  are,  according  to  the  Principles 
of  Liberty,  intitled  to  every  Part  of  what  they  conceive  to  be  the  Benefits  of  it,  entire  and  com- 
pleat,  fo  far  as  confifts  with  the  Welfare  of  civil  Government;  yet  the  Members  of  our  Church  in 
America  do  not  thus  enjoy  its  Benefits,  having  no  Proteftant  Bifhop  within  jooo  Miles  of  them  j 
a  Cal'e,  which  never  had  its  Parallel  before  in  the  Chriftian  World." 

Anfxv^er  to  Dr.  May  hew*  s  Oh/ervau 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


rH  E  Author  of  the  following  Defence  legs 
Leave  to  inform  his  Readers^  that  it  was  his 
.  Deftgn  not  to  reply  to  the  Writers  againft  the 
Appeal,  until  they  fhould  have  offered  all  they  had 
to  fay  upon  the  Subje^y  as  he  intended  his  Defence 
fhould  be  general. .  IVith  this  View  he  continued  long 
filenty  waiting  -patiently  for  his  Turn  to  be  heardy 
and  expelling  that  a  Tear*s  Oppofition  and  A- 
hufe  would  fatisfy  his  moft  zealous  Adverfaries.  But 
before  the  Tear  was  compleatedy  he  was  called  upon 
by  fome  of  his  Friends^  and  toJdy  that  many  were 
impatient  to  fee  the  general  Defence  that  had  been 
promifedy  and  that  to  wait  any  longer  upon  the  Ame- 
rican Whig,  who  dif covered  no  Signs  of  coming  to- 
wards a  Ccnclufiony  would  be  conjidered  as  a  Piece  of 
very  nee  die fs  Complaifance — efpecially  as  it  was  pretty 
well  known  what  he  could  fay^  from  what  he  had 
[aid  in  near  50  Papers^  and  as  an  Anfwerer  was  ready 
to  reply  to  every  l^hing  worthy  of  Notice  that  he  fhould 
fay.  Upon  this  Reprefentation  the  Author  proceeded 
to  prepare  the  following  Sheets.  He  foon  found  that 
his  chief  Difficulty  would  conjijly  in  confining  a  Reply 
to  fo  many  Particulars  within  a  moderate  Number  of 
Pages.  This  Difficulty  he  counteracted  as  much  as  he 
couldy  confijiently  with  his  Intention  of  doing  Juftice 
to  himfelf  and  his  Caufe  j  but  Jlill  he  is  much  diffa-- 
tisfied  with  the  Length  of  his  Performance^  which 
be  hopes  may  be  forgiven  himt 

THE 


ADVERTISEMENT. 

^  H E  Author  confiders  it  as  his  Misfortune  that 
he  is  brought  into  fiich  a  Difpute^  in  this  turbulent 
Seafon.  While  the  Minds  of  Men  are  agitated  with 
Contefts  and  Jealoufies  about  political  Rights  and  Pri- 
vileges^ it  is  not  a  'Time  to  enter  into  Controvcrfies 
relating  to  Matters  of  Religion,  ti  may  be  faid^ 
V)ho  but  the  Author  of  the  Appeal  has  introduced  the 
Controyerfy  about  American  Bifljops  ?  He  confeffes  he 
has  occajloned  it ;  hut  he  is  not  convinced  that  he  has 
given  any  jujl  Caufe  for  the  Out-Cry  that  has  been 
made.  He  mea?it  no  Injury  to  any  human  Great urey 
and  forefaw  no  Oppofition '  to  what  he  hiew  was.,  in 
its  Nature  and  Intention^  altogether  harmlefs  and  in- 
cffenfive.  Moreover.,  when  the  Appeal  was  drawn 
up.,  the  Colonifts  were  in  high  good  Humor  \  and  when 
it  was  publifhed.,  he  was  not  apprehenfive  of  the  ge^ 
neral  Difcontent  that  foon  followed.  Coyifcious  there- 
fore of  his  Innocence  in  this  Rcfpe^l.,  he  doubts  not 
hut  the  fiber  and  candid  will  acquit  him  \  and  as  to 
•  the  Cenfure  or  Condemnation  of  others^  although  he 
could  wifh  to  avoid  it^  it  will  noi  greatly  diflrefs  him, 

^  H  E  Writers  againfl  the  Appeal  have  endea- 
voured to  avail  themf elves  of  the  prefent  Troubles  -,  re- 
frefenting  that  the  Taxation  of  the  Colonies.,  and  the 
Fropofal  of  fending  BiJIoops  to  America^  are  Parts  of 
one  general  Syjiem  ;  and  that  the  latter  is  as  unfriend- 
ly to  our  religious.,  as  the  former  is  to  our  political^ 
Privileges.  But  their  Succefs  appears  to  have  been  in- 
adequate to  their  Wifhes.  Very  few.,  it  is  thought.^ 
have  been  fo  far  blinded  as  not  to  fee..,  that.,  although 
ihefe  Things^  in  the  prefent  Contr over fy.,  have  been  art- 
fully blended  together.^  they  have  in  Reality  no  Man- 
ner of  Conneftion.  And  it  is  well  known.,  that  tht 
T)iffenters  in  general  would  not  anfwer  Po  this  Spur., 
when  it  was  clofely  applied  to  thm^  in  fever al  Counties., 
in  the  late  Ele^ions.  CON- 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTORY  Obfervations,  p.  x 

The  Reafonablenefs  of  the  propofed  Epifcopatc 
allowed,  by  Dr.  Chaimcy  and  the  American  IVhig^ 

The  Dcfign  of  the  prefent  Defence^  p.  9 

Dr.  C's  Confidence,  p.  1 1— and  Complaint,  p.  12 

The  Church  of  England's  5^ //^  of  the  Dodrine 
of  Epifcopacy  juilifies  the  Plea  for  American  Bi- 
Ihops,  P*  ^5 

Dr.  C.  following  the  Trent cum^  mifreprefents  th^ 
principles  of  our  Reformers,  P*  ^7 

That  the  Reformation  in  England  was  fettled 
upon  epifcopal  Principles,  proved  from  the  Preface 
to  the  Ordinal,  p.  18 — from  the  Injlitution  of  a 
Chnfiian  Man^  &c.  p.  21 

The  Principles  of  Cranmer  and  our  other  Re- 
formers particularly  confidered,  and  proved  to  be 
epifcopal,  p.  24 

The  Reformation  re-eflabiilhed  by  Q^  Elizabeth 
upon  the  fame  Principles,  p.  31 

The  Dodtrine  of  Epifcopacy  not  difputed  in  the 
former  Part  of  the  Queen's  Reign,  p.  32.  When 
this  Do6lrine  was  afterwards  attacked,  it  was  vigo- 
roufly  defended,  hy  JVhit gift ^  p.  33 — by  Bancroft^ 
p.  36™by  liutton^  p.  37— by  Bilfon^  p.  38— by 
Hooker^  Saravia  and  m.any  others,  p.  40 

Why  we  hear  not  of  Re-Ordination  in   that 

Reign, 


Ill  CONTENTS. 

Reign,  p.  42 — the  Cale  of  JVhittinghamy  I'ravers^ 
&c.  p.  43 

The  Church  of  England  reproached  by  Dr.  C. 
k  p.  47 — after    the  Example  of  Papifts   and  Infi- 

dels, p.  48 

The  Nature  of  the  Supremacy  dated,  according 
to  the  Articles  and  the  Queen's  hijun5fions^  p.  49--- 
according  to  the  Tenor  of  the  CommiJJions  granted 
by  the  Crown,  and  an  Explanation  of  Hen,  VIII. 
P-  SI — ^^<^  a  Declaration  of  Jamc^  I.  P-  58 

Of  an  uninterrupted  Succejfion^  p.  59 

An  AfTertion  of  Mr.  Petoy  confuted,         p.  64 
The  Cafe  of  xh^  foreign  Frotejiarts^  &c.      p.  66 
Dr.  C's  Objedions  to  an  uninterrupted  SuccefTi- 
on  anfwered,  P'  73 

Why  the  Author  choofes  not  to  enter  into  the 
general  Controverfy  concerning  Epifcopacy,    p.  76 
The  Opinion  of  Chillingworth^  UJher^  Burnet  and 
Stilling  fleet  ^  concerning  Epifcopacy,  P-  7^ 

^^erius  and  Colluthus  the  firft  Prelbyterians,  p.  86 
A  remarkable  Inflance  of  D,  C's  AlTurance,  p.  89 
The  Waldenfes  always  Epifcopalians,  P-  9 1 

The  Charge  againll  the  Author,  ?)f  unfairly  quot- 
ing A^s  xix.  6.  refuted,  "  •  P-  93 
The   Diffenting    Gentleman's   Objections   to  the 
Office  for  Confii'mation,  fully  anfwered  from  Mr. 
White ^                                              '                P-  95 
The  American  Church  without  Bilhops,  necerf^- 
rily  deftitute  of  a  regular  Government,  p.  100 — 
and  of  Ordination,                                         p.   loi 
The  State  of  Difcipline  in  the  Church  at  Home, 

■  P.  loS 

Of  the  Difcipline  propofed  for  the  Church  in 

America,  under  an  Epifcopate,  p.   112 

Of  thofe  who  have  loft  their  Lives  in   going 

Home  for  Ji.  Orders,  p.  120 

Of 


CONTENTS.  ui 

Of  the  Expenfivenefs  of  fuch  a  Voyage,  p.  123 

The  Want  of  Clergymen  in  America  chiefly 
owing  to  the  great  Difficulty  of  obtaining  Ordi- 
nation, p.   126. 

A  PafTage  ,  in  the  Billiop  of  Landaff's  Sermon 
vindicated,  p.  129 

The  Charadler  of  the  American  Clergy,    p.  1 3 1 

The  Sufferings  of  the  American  Church  have  no 
Parallel,  .  P-   ^37 

The  Charaders  of  the  Archbifhops  Farkerj 
JVhitgift^  Bancroft  and  Laud^  p.  140 

Of  the  Minifters  ejeded  by  the  A61  of  Unifor- 
mity, p.  143— their  Sufferings  not  to  be  compared 
with  thofe  of  the  loyal  Clergy  during  the  Uiurpa- 
tion,        ^  p.   145 

What  is  meant  by  natural  Rights^  p.  148 

The  Loyalty  of  DifTenters  in  America  not  im- 
peached in  the  Appeal^  p.  149 

The  American  Church  has  not  the  fame  Privi- 
leges with  the  other  religious  Denominations  in  the 
Colonies,  P-  ^53 

The  Charge  <»f  Ingratitude  and  Undutifulneis 
refuted,  p.  154 

How  the  propofed  Epifcopate  will  operate  in 
New-England,  p-  158 

Of  the  external  Circumftances  of  the  propoled 
Bifhops,  p.  160 

The  Cafe  of  Paul  of  Samofata^  p.  165 

A  Decree  of  the  4th  Council  of  Carthage  con- 
fidered,  p.  166 

For  what  Reafons  the  ^p^^/ was  judged  to  be 

not  unfeafonable,  P-  ^7^ 

Of  the   Number    of   American  Epifcopalians, 

P-  17.4 

An  American  Epifcopate  a  proper  Monument 

of  national  Gratitude,  p.  179 

Savages 


iv  CONTENTS. 

lavages  muft  be  civilized,  previoufly  to  tht'itf 
Converfion,  p.  185 

The  Converfion  of  the  Heathens  not  the  primary- 
End  of  the  Society's  Incorporation,  p.  189 

Of  the  Indian  MilTions  in  New-England^    p.  192 

The  Defign  of  the  Non-Epifcopcilians  in  Bofton 
for  the  Converfion  of  the  Indians,  not  defeated  by 
epfcopal  Influence,  p.  196 

That  any  Members  of  the  Church  fliould  be 
averfe  to  the  propofed  Epifcopate^  incredible,  p.  199 

That  the  Plan  for  American  Biihops  was  legally' 
fetled,  p.  201 

That  this  Plan  is  no  Violation  of  the  73d  Canon^ 

p.  204 

Dr.  Chauncy\  formal  Objeftions  to  it  anfweredy 

p.  206 — 220 

His  Extra£fc  from  Dr.  Mayhew  anfwered  from 
Mr.  Apthorp^  p.  220— 22S 

Dr.  C.  willing  the  American  Church  fhould  have 
the  Epifcopate  propofed,  but  denies  it  to  be  a  Right, 

p.  229 

That  this  Epifcopate  is  not  propofed  on  the 
Footing  of  an  Eflablifhment,  p.  230 

The  Teftim.ony  of  Dr.  6".  Chandler^  P-  23 1 

Why  the  Petition  of  the  Prefbyterians  in  New- 
Tork  for  a  Charter^  was  rejedled,  P-  ^33 

Dr.  BenJon\  Teftimony  hi  Favor  of  the  Moderai- 
tionof  the  Church  of  England  vindicated,    p.  235 

The  Opinion  of  the  mofl;  eminent  Reformers  and 
foreign  Proteflants,  concerning  Epifcopacy,  p.  237 
— and  the  Church  of  England,.  p.  241 

That  the  Two  popular  Obje6tions  of  tithes  and 
fpiritual  Courts  are  now  acknowledged  to  be  im- 
pertinent, p.  244 

That  the  Members  of  the  Church  In  America 

d© 


.CONTENTS.  ^ 

do  not  defire  an  Eflablifhment  of  'T'ithes.  for  the 
Support  of  the  Clergy,  p.  248 

That  it  has  never  been  propofed  to  fupport  Ame- 
rican Bifhops  by  a  Tax  upon  Americans,    p.  249 

That  the  propofed  Biiliops  fhould  hereafter  be 
invefted  with  civil  Authority,  improbable^      P-  251 

That  Reafons  of  Policy  favor  the  propofed  Epif- 
copate,  ■  P-  255 

Dr.  Chauncy  called  upon  to  produce  fome  Evi- 
dence, that  the  Epifcopate  aimed  at,  correfponds 
hot  with  our  public  Declarations,  p.  25S 

That    the  propofed  Epifcopate   is  pradlicable, 

'     '  p.  26t 

i:\it  Conchfion^  .  p.  264 


»* 


^"BitLAt  A. 


ERRATA 

Page.  Line. 

3.       6,  for  nvaSi  r.  nvere. 
14.       6.  for  Dyers,  r.  //^^  Dyers. 

18.  15.  for  Instruction,   r.  Institution; 

19.  9.  after  concei've,  add  ^'. 

20.  8.  for  ^^,  r   have  been 

31.       30.  for  although  ii  is  there,  r.  ivhcre  it  is, 

55.     21    after  Fa?ni!y,  add  or  »o/, 

00.        4,  for  /o  London,  r.  yt;r  London, 

76.      1 2.  for  ^vhitheredi  r.  'withered, 
100.      27.  for//',  r   c/^. 
153.      14.  for  Perjujjon^,  r.  Perfuajions. 
160.       il  after  Church,  add  /k^rf, 
188.      20.  for  <v  agar  ant,  r,  ^vagrant, 
"Zio.      i^.iovthe,   Y.this. 

^^^-     33    for  0?/ //i?^  Church,  r.  ©/"//^^  Church, 
230      30.  for  expects,  r.  defires. 

Ibid.     32.    after  EJiabliJh77it>it,   add,  z«  /if^  -S^«/^  nioherein  it  ii 
obje^ed 

258.  In  the  Note,   for  £/;.'/;  Tm^^j,  r.  ff//j'j'i  T>^^j. 

259.  1.  II,  for  o'ver-aSi,  r.  o-T^t^ri'  «^. 

Other  /^/^-/-rt/  Errata,  of  icfs    Confequence,   need   not  be 
pointed  out. 


i 

Introdu6lory  Obfervations. 

T  is  common  for  thofe  who  are  engaged  In 
public  Difputes,  to  profefs  their  Averfion  to 
Controverfy.  If  this  Profi^fTion  were  needful,  I 
could  make  it  with  great  Truth  and  Sincerity. 
For  my  natural  Difpofition  inclines  me  to  comply 
with,  and  conform  to,  the  Sentiments  of  others,  as 
far  as  I  can  confiftcntly,  and  with  a  good  Confci- 
ence,  rather  than  to  oppofe  them.  To  this  Difpo- 
fition, however,  I  find  that  my  prefent  Situation 
is  very  unfavourable  ;  fmce  it  obliges  me  to  enter 
into  a  publick  Debate  •,— a  Debate  which  will  pro- 
bably be  of  long  Continuance, — and  with  a  Num- 
ber of  Opponents  at  the  fame  Time,— -efpeci ally 
with  fuch  Opponents  as  have  hitherto  exhibited,  in 
Oppofition  to  the  Appeal  to  the  Publick  in  Behalf  of 
the  Church  of  England  in  America. 

When  this  well-meant  Appeal  was  made,  the 
Propofal  for  an  American  Episcopate  as  therein 
explained,  appeared  to  me  to  be  fo  reafonable,  and 
intirely  unexceptionable,  that  I  could  then  as  eafily 
believe  that  the  Dillenters  in  this  Country,  who  of 
late  Years  had  difclaimed  the  Principles  of  Into- 
lerance, would  generoufly  and  publickly  declare 
their  Approbation  of  our  Plan,  as  that  they  would 
oppofe  it  with  Violence.  But  knowing  that  I  might 
poflibly  be  biaffed  in  my  Judgment,  and  that 
Things  might  not  appear  to  others  in  the  fame 
Light  v/herein  I  viewed  them  my felf;  I  intimated 
(Page  2)   my  Readinefs   to  attend   any  Objecftors, 

B  '  that 


INTRODUCTORY 

that  might  arife,  in  a  fair  and  candid  Debate  ;  aHcl 
requtfted  (Page  1 18)  that  they  would  pro^>oie  their 
Objections,    '  in   inch   a  charitable    and  Chriiiian 

*  Way,  that  /  might  be  the  better  for  them,  and 

*  They  not  the  worle.'  A  Debate  has  been  brought 
on  i  how  '  fair  and  candid'  on  the  Part  of  my  Op- 
ponents, the  impartial  Reader  can  judge  : — Ob- 
jcdions  have  been  ohered  •,  but  whether  '  in  fuch 
'  a  charitable  and  Ciiniiian  Way',  that  the  Objec- 
tors '  are  not  the  worle  for  them',  a  fmall  Degree 
of  Self-Examinadon  will  enable  them  belt  to  judge 
for  themfelve^. 

Before  I  reply  to  the  Particulars  objeded,  it 
may  be  proper  to  make  a  few  general  Introductory 
Oblervauions,  relating  chiefly  to  the  Manner  where- 
in I  have  been  oppoied  •,  which  has  been  different 
from  what,  in  my  humble  Conception,  I  had  a 
Right  to  expect,  in  thefe  feveral  Refpe«5l:s. 

I.  As  the  Appeal  was  a  ferious  Performance,  and 
its  general  Subje6c  confelledly  of  Importance,  fe- 
rious Anfwers,  if  any,  ought  to  have  been  given  it. 
But  it  may  be  faid  of  fome  of  my  Opponents,  that 
inftead  of  giving  ferious  Anfwers,  they  have  endea- 
voured to  place  the  whole  Matter  in  Difpute  in  a 
ludicrous  Light,  and  have  condefcended  to  adt  the 
Part  of  Buffoons^  for  the  Amufement,  rather  than 
oi  jober  Reajoners^  for  the  Initrud:ion,  of  the  good- 
natured  Reader  : — That,  infcead  of  applying  them- 
felves  fairly  to  convince  the  Judgment,  they  have- 
ufed  all  their  Addrefs  to  engage  the  Prejudices,  and 
inflame  the  PaHloris,  of  the  Populace,  againfl  the 
Refidcnce  of  Biuiops  in  America. 

2,   I^I 


OBSERVATIONS. 

2.  In  Order  thereto,  the  propofed  Epifcopate 
has  been  grofsly  mifreprefented,  the  Appeal  has 
been  per\Trted,  and  the  Author  and  his  Friends 
abufed,  with  an  unlparing  Hand.  If  the  Plan  for 
the  Settlement  of  Bifhops  in  America^  as  publifhed 
in  the  Appeal^  was  inconfiftent  with  the  Rights  or 
Liberties  cf  any  Denomination  of  Chrlflians,  its 
Inconfiilency  faould  have  been  fairly  pointed  out; 
and  it  this  had  been  done  with  Temper  and  Decency, 
it  would  have  had  fo  much  the  greater  Effe^i:,  with 
all  reafonable  and  confiderate  Perfons.  But  every 
one  can  fee  that  this  has  not  been  done ;  and  it  is 
one  of  the  firft  Obiervations  that  muft  occur  to  the 
Reader,  that  the  Epifcopate  of  my  Opponents,  is 
not  the  Epifcopate  of  the  Appeal.  The  Character 
aiTumed  by  them  requires  them  to  oppofe  the  latter  \ 
whereas  they  have  impofed  upon  their  Readers,  in- 
flead  of  it,  anEpifcopate  of  their  own,  contrived  for 
the  Purpofe  of  fupporting  a  Clamour,  They  have 
loudly  and  vehemently  declaimed,  againft  the  E- 
ftablilliment  of  ecclefiaftical  Tyranny  in  this  Land 
of  Liberty— againft  depriving  Men  of  their  reli- 
gious Freedom  and  worldly  Property,  and  even  of 
their  natural  Rights ',  as  if  thefe  Evils  were  confti- 
tuent  Parts  of  the  Epifcopate  in  Qiieftion,  or  at 
leaft  muft  reftilt  from  it  by  necelTary  Confequence. 
And  yet  I  fee  not  how  it  is  poftibie,  that  they  ftiould 
not  know  in  their  own  Confciences,  that  nothinG: 
they  have  faid  in  this  Strain,  militates  either  againft 
me,  or  the  Biftiops  propofed.  Indeed  Paftages  from 
the  Appeal  have  been  quoted,  to  enable  them  to 
carry  on  the  lUufion  ;  but  before  fuch  PafTages, 
could  anfwer  the  Purpofe,  it  was  found  neceftary 
to  put  them  to  the  Tortvire,  and  to  vvreft  them, 
from  their  plain  and  obvioys  Meaning.  As  to  any 
pt^rfonal  Abufes  I  have  received  from  thefe  Vv'riters, 

B  2  1  truly 


4        INTRODUCTORY 

I  truly  defpife  them,  and  lliall  filently  pafs  them  over 
with  the  Contem^^t  they  deferve.  They  affed  not 
the  Merits  of  the  Caufe  in  Debate,  and  are  of  no 
Confequence  to  any  but  themfehes.  I  never  ex- 
pe6led  much  Fame  as  an  Author  •,  and  as  to  my  pri- 
vate or  moral  Charad:er,  I  do  not  conceive,  that 
^in  the  Eflimation  of  a  fingle  Perfon  whrfe  Opinion 
is  worthy  of  Regard,  it  has  really  received  any  In- 
jury, from  the  malevolent  Impeacliments  of  my 
literary  Adverfaries. 

3.  I  ESTEEM  it  no  fmall  Proof  of  the  "Want  of 
Candour  in  fome  of  my  Opponents,  that  they  have 
brought  on  their  Attacks  in  the  Weekly  Papers  -,  by 
which  Contrivance,  any  Defence  that  I  can  make, 
will  have  no  Chance  to  be  feen  by  many  of  their 
Readers.  But,  not  contented  with  a  fmgle  Impref- 
fion  of  their  Publications,  they  have  caufed  them 
to  be  reprinted  in  feveral  of  the  Colonies.  No 
fooner  './ere  the  Harangues  of  the  American  Whig 
addrefled  to  the  Inhabitants  of  New-Tcrk^  than 
they  were  reverberated  from  the  Gazettes  of  Phi- 
ladelphia and  Bojlon.  The  falfe  Alarm  founded  in 
Philadelphia  by  the  Centinel,  was  alfo  immedi- 
ately echoed  from  the  PrefTes  of  other  Places.  By . 
this  Management,  all  the  bitter  Things,  and  all  the 
unfair  Things,  as  well  as  all  the  ludicrous  Expref- 
fions,  which  they  have  uttered  againft  the  Church, 
have  been  widely  circulated  amongft  the  People  •, 
many  of  whom  are  ignorant,  fome  of  them  great- 
ly prejudiced  againft  us,  and  perhaps  not  one  in  a 
Hundred  of  them  has  ever  had  an  Opportunity,  of 
hearing  what  is  faid  on  the  other  Side.  Such  Con- 
dud:  is  artful,  and  has  a  Tendency  to  raife  and  in- 
iiame  a  Party  ^  but  it  can  never  promote  the  In- 
tcrv^lls  of  Truth  ^nd  Condour.     I  may  appeal  to 

Dr, 


OBSERVATIONS. 

Dr.  Chauncy  whether  this  is  generous  and  fair  •, 
who  (Page  6)  pronounces  it  to  be  Matter  of  Com- 
plaint, when  Men  are  prevented  from  making  a 
Judgment  upon  an  impartial  hearing  of  the  Cafe^ 
and  are  led  to  give  Sentence,  upon  hearing  one  Side 
only.  Had  indeed  the  Nature  of  the  propofed  E- 
pifcopate  been  honeftly  explained,  and  the  Argu- 
ments in  Favour  of  it  fairly  reprefcnted  •,  in  that 
Cafe,  thefe  periodical  Gentlemen  might  have  ob- 
jed:ed  and  declaimed,  and  have  publifhed  their  Ob- 
je<fl:ions  and  Declamations  in  every  Paper  upon  the 
Continent,  and  ilill  their  Readers  might  have  been 
capable  of  judging  of  the  Matter  in  Difpute.  But 
fuch  Impartiality  is  fcldom  to  be  found  in  the  Wri- 
ters of  Controverfy  •,  and  I  am  forry  to  fay.  it  has 
not  fhewn  itfeif  in  the  PFhigs  and  Centinels  of 
America. 

4.  I  HAVE  another  moft  material  Obfervation  to 
make,  of  a  different  Kind,  and  I  requeit  of  every 
Reader  that  he  will  attend  to  it ;  namely,  that 
notwithftanding  all  the  clamorous  Oppofition  that 
has  been  made  to  the  Appeal^  the  grand  Point 
which  was  therein  fubmitted  to  the  Confideration 
of  the  Public,  has  been  fairly  given  tip  by  my 
Opponents.  The  true  State  of  the  Cafe  is  as 
follows.  After  a  Plan,  for  the  Introduction  of  an 
American  Epifcopate,  for  the  fole  Purpofe  of  re- 
lieving the  fpiritual  Wants  of  the  Church,  had 
been  agreed  upon  by  many  of  the  Bifhops  at 
Home — after  it  had  been  made  known  to,  and  had 
received  the  Approbation  of,  feveral  Perfons  of  the 
bigheft  Rank  in  the  Kingdom, — and  had  been  cor- 
,  dially  confented  to,  by  the  American  Clergy  in  the 
northern  Colonies  ;  as  the  utmofl  Care  had  been 
taken  to  render  it  jjnexceptionable  to  ail  Manner 

of 


INTRODUCTORY 

of  Perfons,  it  was  thought,  that,  in  Return  for 
the  vifible  Abatement  of  Prejudices  againft  the 
Church  in  the  Minds  of  DiiTcnters,  and  with  a 
View  of  removing  all  poflible  Sufpicions  of  Evil, 
it  would  be  received  by  them  as  a  Mark  of  Friend- 
fhip,  and  as  a  Proof  of  our  candid  and  generous 
Difpofition  towards  them,  if  we  fhould  unrefer- 
vedly  explain  this  Plan  to  them  before  it  fhould 
be  carried  into  Execution  •,  declaring  at  the  fame 
Time  our  Willingnefs  to  attend  to  their  Objedions, 
Ihould  there  be  any,  againft  it.  With  this  Defign 
the  Appeal  to  the  Public  was  undertaken  ;  and 
therein  the  proposed  Episcopate  was  fairly  and 
fully  explained,  and  frankly  fubmitted  to  a  pubhc 
Examination  and  DifcufTion.  Whoever  will  be  at 
the  Trouble  of  reading  the  Appeal  may  fee  that 
this  was  the  Defign  of  it,  and  that  the  only  Point 
offered  to  be  debated  was,  whether  it  is  reaibnable 
that  the  American  Church  fhould  have  such  am 
Episcopate  as  is  therein  explained  and  pro- 
posed •,  and  not,  whether  any  Form  of  an  Epif- 
copate  that  was  not  explained  nor  propofed,  might 
be  liable  to  Exceptions.  For  fome  Months  after 
this  Explanation  and  Propofal  were  offered  to  the 
Public,  there  was  a  dead  Silence.  Not  the  leaft 
Intimation  was  given  in  the  public  Papers,  or,  fo 
far  as  I  could  learn,  even  in  Converfation,  that  any 
were  diffatisfied.  But  at  length  it  was  difcovered, 
that  a  Number  of  Perfons  had  entered  into  a 
Combination  to  run  down  the  Appeal^  and  vigo- 
roufly  to  oppofe,  at  any  Rate,  the  Refidence  of 
Bifhops  in  America  -,  and  agreeably  to  the  general 
Plan  of  Operations  that  had  been  fettled,  within 
the  Compafs  of  a  few  Weeks,  Dr.  Chauncey^  the 
Amtrican  Whig^  and  the  Centinel^  made  their  Ap- 
pearance.    Dr.  Chauncey^  from  whom    the    chief 

Execution 


OBSERVATIONS. 

Execution  Iccms  to  have  been  expedled,  brought 
on  what  may  be  called,  in  ibme  Senfe,  a  regular 
Attack  upon  the  Appeal^  openly  appearing  in  his 
proper  Perfon.  The  American  Whig  and  the 
Centiml  undertook  to  make  as  great  a  Diverlion 
as  they  could,  in  weekly  Skirmilhes — a  Number 
of  Volunteers  being  invited  in  the  mean  Time  to 
aflift  them  by  occafional  Sallies.  The  Operation^ 
were  carried  on  with  as  much  Spirit  and  Warmth 
as  the  Friends  of  thefe  Adventurers  could  willi  \  but 
notwithftanding  all  their  Refolution,  Alertneis  and 
Caution,  they  have  been  obliged  to  give  up  the 
grand  Objedl  of  the  Conteil,  as  above  -explained. 

Dr.  Chauncey  declares  for  himfelf  and  his  Bre- 
thren (Page  i8oJ  in  the  following  Words:  fVe 
dejire  no  other  Liberty^  than  to  be  left  unreftrained 
i7i  the  Exercife  of  our  religious  Principles^  in  fo  far 
as  we  are  good  Members  of  Society.  And  we  are 
perfectly  willing  Epifcopalians  fhould  tnjoy  this  Li^ 
berty  to  the  full.  If  they  think  Bifhops^  in  their 
appropriated  Senfe^  were  conjlituted  by  Chrifi^  or  his 
Apofiles^  we  objeB  7iot  a  Word  againfi  their  having 
us  many  of  them  as  they  pleafe^  if  they  will  be  con- 
tent to  have  them  with  Authority  altogether  de- 
rived from  Chrift,  The  good  Doctor  here  fpeaks 
immediately  to  the  Point  in  Queftion,  and  grants 
us  all  that  we  defire  •,  in  Return  for  which  Ge- 
ncrofity,  I  heartily  wifh  that  he  and  his  Brethren 
may  always  continue  to  be  left  unrefirained  in  the 
Exercife  of  their  religious  Principles^  infofar  as  they 
are  good  Members  of  Society  \  and  I  have  never 
heard  that  the  Dodlor  is  a  bad  one.  The  fame 
liberal  Sentiment  he  again  exprelTes,  but  more  la- 
conically^ in  Page  200  •,  Whoever  obje^ed^  fays  he, 
iij^ainji  this  compkat  Enjoyment^  upon  th:  Footing  of  a 

perfect 


8  INTRODUCTORY 

perfe5f  Equality  ?  So  again  in  Page  189,  li  is  not 
SIMPLY  the  Exercife  of  any  of  their  religious  Princi- 
ples that  would  give  the  leafi  Uneafinefs^  nor  yet  the 
Exercife  of  them  under  as  many  purely  spiritual 
BifJoops  as  they  could  wifh  to  have  ;  hut  their  having 
Bifhops  under  a  State  Establishment.  And  he 
introduces  (Page  177)  the  late  Dr.  Mayhew^  as 
approaching  very  far  towards  the  fame  Conceflion. 

We  are  under  the  like  Obligations  to  the  Ame- 
rican Whig,  who  fays  (Numb,  i.)  in  his  own  pe- 
culiar Phrafeology,  wherein  every  Man  fhould  be 
allowed  to  exprefs  himfelf  :  "  Tis  true,  the  Pam- 
phlet (meaning  the  Appeal)  is  fpecious,  and 
appears  to  afk  nothing  but  what  is  highly  rea- 
fonable ;  and  could  any  Man,  above  the  Capa- 
*'  city  of  an  Idiot  really  perfuade  himfelf,  that 
*'  the  Dr.  and  the  Convention  would  content 
*'  themfelves  with  a  Bilhop,  fo  limited  and  cur- 
^  tailed  as  he  is  pleafed  to  reprefent  his  future 
*'  Lordihip  •,  it  were  manifeft  Injuftice  to  deny 
*'  them  what  in  their  Opinion  their  eternal  Sal- 
"  vation  fo  greatly  depends  upon."  He  repeats 
the  fame  Conceffion  (Numb.  XXI.)  "  Did  they 
"  (the  Clergy)  really  defire,  or  was  there  theleaft 
**  Probability  of  obtaining  fuch  an  ideal  Bifhop  as 
"  they  hold  up  to  public  View,  in  Order  to  lull 
*'  us  into  Security,  while  themfelves  are  profecu- 
"  ting  their  Scheme,  for  procuring  a  true  modern 
"  Prelate,  no  other  Denomination  ought  in  Juftice 
"  to  give  them  any  Oppofition."  And  again 
(Numb.  XXII.)  "  The  Colonifts  have  not  as  yet 
"  that  I  know  of,  made  any  Obje<5lions  againft 
'^  the  Epifcopalians  ^  having  primitive  Bilhops. 
"  Such  I  believe  would  give  no  Umbrage  to  Per- 
"  fons  of  other  Denominations." 

The 


OBSERVATIONS. 

'The  Ce?jtinel  indeed  has  not  declared  himfelffo 
openly  and  generouily  in  our  Favour ;  but  yet 
from  fundry  broken  Hints  and  Intimations  inter- 
fperfed  up  and  down  his  Papers,  as  well  as  from 
the  whole  Tenor  of  his  Writings,  it  may  be  con- 
cluded, that  he  differs  not  from  his  Fellow-La^ 
bourers  above  quoted,  in  fa  elfential  a  Point, 

Now  from  thefe  Declarations  it  is  evident,  that 
fuch  an  Epifcopate  as  is  propoied  in  the  Appeal^ 
will  give  no  Umbrage  to  the  DifTenters  in  this  Coun- 
try, and  that  ail  the  Oppofition  that  has  been 
made  againft  the  Settlement  of  American  Eifliops, 
has  been  made  on  the  Suppofition  of  their  being 
different  from  what  we  have  held  up  to  public  View, 
So  far  as  they  fhall  h^  the  fame  ^wq  cannot  now  doubt 
but  the  Diffenters  will  be  fatisfied.  The  Subject 
has  been  taken  into  the  clofefl  Examination  by  the 
Champions  of  their  Party,  without  the  leaft  Dif- 
pofition  to  make  us  unreasonable  ConcefTions  •,  and 
they  have  declared  that  they  obje5f  not  a  Word  againft 
our  having  Bifliops,  if  they  are  not  to  be  invefted 
with  temporal  Authority,— that  it  were  manifeft 
Injuftice  to  oppofe  them — that  no  other  Denofnination 
cught  in  Juftice  to  give  us  Oppofition^  and  the  like. 
So  full  and  authentic  a  Determination  of  the  Dif- 
fenters in  Favour  of  the  Epifcopate  propofed,  it  i$ 
hoped,  will  not  fail  of  having  its  proper  Effect  oi\ 
all  Sides,  both  here  and  at  home. 

The  Matter  being  brought  to  this  IfTue,  I  might 
give  up  all  farther  Controverfy  ;  were  it  not  that  I 
am  thought  bound,  in  Juftice  to  my  own  Chara6ler, 
to  make  a  more  particular  Defence  of  the  Appeal — 
and  in  Duty  to  the  Church  of  Englau^,    to  vindi- 

C  '  cate 


lo  INTRODUCTORY 

cate  her  from  thofe  injurious  Afperfions  and  Re- 
proaches, which  I  have,  although  very  innocently, 
occafioned.  In  Compliance  therefore  with  thefe 
Obligations,  I  lliall  go  on  to  confider  the  moft  ma- 
terial Things  that  have  been  objeded  to  both,  by 
the  Writers  with  v/hom  I  am  concerned  ;  and,  not- 
withflianding  that  Recrimination  is  generally  allowed 
to  bejuft^  I  lliall  carefully  avoid  returning  Railing 
for  Railings  as  it  is  but  a  poor  Expedient  at  befb, 
and  as  I  am  not  apprehenfive  that  I  fhall  have  any 
Manner  of  Occalion  for  it. 


When  the  American  JVhig  made  his  firfl  Exhibi- 
tion, I  promifed  in  an  Advertisement  to  the  Puhlicy 
that,  although  Dr.  Chauncey  would  propably  be 
intitled  to  my  principal  Attention,  yet  any  other 
Writers  who  ihould  think  fit  to  animadvert  on  the 
Appeal^  fhould  have  fuch  Notice  taken  of  them,  as 
they  fhould  be  found  to  deferve.  From  this  Pro- 
mife,  it  is  very  pofiible  that  the  American  Whig  and 
the  Centinel  may  be  difappointed,  in  finding  they 
make  no  greater  Figure  in  the  following  Defence. 
But  as  they  have  offered  very  little  which  has  not 
been  as  well  faid  by  Dr.  Chauncey^  and  as  they  have 
both  received  particular  Anfwers — the  former,  in  a 
weekly  Paper,  intitled,  AwHip/(5r  the  American 
Whig  \  and  the  latter,  in  another  weekly  Paper,  in- 
titled,  T^he  Anatomift — I  believe  I  fhall  not  be  charg- 
ed by  others  with  any  criminal  Negledl.  However, 
Notice  will  probably  be  taken  of  them  on  fom.e  par- 
ticular Occafions.  As  to  the  Authors  of  two  ano- 
nymous Pamphlets  aimed  at  the  Appeal  \  one,  in 
the  Form  of  a  Letter^  addrelled  to  the  Ruler  of  St, 
John^s  Churchy  and  figned  an  Antiepifcopalian  ;  and 
the  other,  in  the  Name  of  a  Prejl^ter  in  Old  En- 
gland-^ 


OBSERVATIONS.  ll 

gland ;  I  know  of  no  Laws  of  Juflice,  or  Honour, 
or  Decency,  that  require  me  to  take  particular  No- 
tice of  them.  The  A'ntiepifcopalian  appears  to  me 
to  be  fuch  a  rambling,  ignorant,  petulant,  pedan- 
tic Writer,  and  his  Piece,  through  the  Blunders  of 
the  Printer  and  thofe  of  the  Author*,  is  in  fome 
Parts  fo  unintelligible,  that  I  never  can  confent  to 
enter  into  any  public  Debate  with  him.  And  as  to 
the  Prejhyter  in  Old  England^  he  feems  to  know  too 
little  of  the  Matters  in  Debate,  to  intitle  him  to  a 
Hearing.  By  this  Time  the  Reader  fees  that  my 
chief  Bufmefs  is  with  Dr.  Chauncey  j  and  this  Bufi- 
nefs  I  fhall  now  proceed  to  fettle. 

By  Way  of  Contrail  to  that  Diffidence  of  him- 
felf,  wherewith  the  Author  of  the  Appeal  intro- 
duced himfelf  to  the  Public ;  the  Dodlor  comes  for- 
ward, in  an  Advertifement^  with  gigantic  Confidence  ; 
telling  his  Readers,  that  the  Performance  which 
followed  was  intirely  his  own, — that  he  had  not 
undertaken  it  in  Virtue  of  any  votsd  Appointmoit  by 

C  3  a  Con- 

*  The  following  cannot  be  called  a  Blunder.  In  Page  lo, 
he  fays  :  When,  njuhere,  or  by  njuhom,  has  Jones  on  the  Heart 
heen  refuted,  or  anfwer^d,  ivhen  he  has  pro-ved  at  large  **  That 
**  the  Englijh  Bijhops  cannot  be  traced  up  to  the  Church  of 
**  Rome  as  their  Original"  ?  Here  the  Marks  of  Quotation 
are'dropped,  and  he  goes  on  :  Does  he  not  pro^ve  that  the  Succef- 
fors  of  Auftin  the  Monk,  being  almoji  entirely  extinSi,  A.  D.  66'^ y 
the  greater  Part  ivere  o/'Scotilli  Ordination  by  Aidan  and  Fin^in, 
from  the  Culdee  Monajiry  of  Columbanus,  njoho  nvere  the  fame 
ivith  Prejbyters,  Sec.  Now  this  Paflage  is  tranfcribed  from  Dr. 
Doddridge's  Lectvkes  (Page  ^oi)  without  giving  him  the 
leaft  Credit  for  fo  important  Information.  But  the  Cream  of 
the  Jeft  is  yet  to  come.  In  this  very  Pafiage,  which  he  h?,s 
privately  tranfcribed,  Dr.  Doddridge  refers  to  a  Note  in  the 
Margin,  in  which  Note  he  fays,  that  Jo7ies  on  tU  Heart  has 
been  anfwered  by  the  Bifiop  of  St.  Afaph. 


12  INTRODUCTORY 

a  Convention  of  the  Clergy^ — and,  that  he  Was  not 
ciffifted  in  it  as  to  Method  or  Managetnent^  by  Direc- 
tions from  fo  learned  and  able  a  Body  of  Men.  And, 
to  increafe  the  Reputation  of  his  Abilities,  his, 
Friends  have  given  out*,  that,  although  he  is  an 
eld  Gentleman  of  Seventy.,  yet  he  wrote  it  in  lefs  than 
two  Months.  Now  what  are  we  to  infer  from  thefe 
high  Compliments  paid  to  the  Do6tor,  by  himfelf 
and  his  Friends  ?  If  any  Thing  farther  was  inten- 
ded by  them,  than  that  we  fliould  confider  him  as 
an  able  Writer,  and  a  ready  V/riter,  it  ought  to  have 
been  explained.  His  being  pofTefled  of  thefe  Two 
literary  Accomplifhments,  I  have  no  Inclination  to 
difpute.  But  I  am  forry,  that,  at  the  Age  of  Scvrn- 
/j,  he  could  find  no  better  Way  ofdifplaying  them, 
than  in  abufing  the  Church  of  England,  and  in  en- 
deavouring to  difgrace  the  Appeal. 

In  his  Introduction  the  Dodlor  complains,  that 
the  Arguments  made  Ufe  of  in  Support  of  our  Pe- 
titions for  American  Bifhops,  had  been  kept  fecrety 
and  fays,  although  an  authentic  Knowledge  of  them 
was  defired^  it  could  not  be  obtained  at  firft^  and  I 
■  know  not  that  it  ever  has  been  fince.  He  feems  here 
to  refer  to  fome  formal  AppHcation  that  had  been 
made  to  our  Clergy  for  this  Intelligence,  which 
had  been  unkindly  rejedied  ;  but  I  know  nothing 
either  of  fuch  an  Application  or  Reje6lion.  On 
the  contrary,  we  have  generally  been  defirous  of 
explaining  the  Reafons  for  our  requelling  Bifhops, 
to  every  one,  as  we  have  had  Opportunity  ;  and 
have  frequently  mentioned  the  Subjed:  to  DiiTenters, 
long  before  any  Petitions  for  that  Purpofe  were 
tranfmitted  or  prepared.      Bpt  the   Dodor  feems 

to 

*  See  the  American  Whig^  Numb.  VilL 


OBSERVATIONS. 

to  think  that  we  ought  to  \i?iYt  fuhlijhed  our  Rea- 
fons    before   we   fent   our  Addrefles.  Others  may 
think  it  fufficient  that  they  were  made  known  inCon- 
verfation,  and  that  all  the   curious   and  inquifitive 
might  fatisfy  themfelves  by  having  Recourfe  to  the 
proper  Perfojis.     But  the  Complaint    is  altogether 
groundlefs.     For  the  Plan  upon  which  it  was  pro- 
pofed  that  Biftiops  Ihould  be  fent  to  America,  and 
the  Arguments  afterwards  made  Ufe  ^f  in  Support  of 
out  Petitions^    actually  were  publifhed,  a  confidera- 
ble  Time  before  the  Petitions  were  fent,  in  an  An- 
Jwer  to  Dr.  Mayhew's  Obfervations^  &c.     And   as 
many  Copies    of  the  Anfwer  were  fent  to  Boilon, 
and  Dr.  May  hew  rejoined  to  it,  and  efpecially  as  that 
Controverfy   engaged  the   public   Attention,  it  is 
very  furpriling  that  Dr.  Chauncey  fhould  have  been 
fo  great  a  Stranger  in  Ifrael^    as  not  to  have  fome 
Knowledge  of  it.  Afterwards,  upon  obferving  that 
many  Perfons  in  the  Colonies  were  ftill  unacquaint- 
ed with  the  Nature  and  Defign  of  our  Application 
for  Bifhops,  in  which  State  they  were  liable  to  un- 
favourable Sufpicions  and  Jealoufies,  it  was  voted 
by  our  Convention.,  that  more  particular  Information 
Ihould  be  publiihed,  and   the  whole   Matter  ex- 
plained,   for  the   Satisfa6tion   of  all  Parties  ♦,    in 
Confequence  of  which,    the  Appeal  was  drawn  up 
and  publiihed. 

The  Doctor's  Method  of  anfwering  the  Appeal^ 
by  taking  into  Conjideration  the  feveral  Sections  one 
by  one  in  their  Order,  I  have  no  Objections  to  •,  and 
therefore  will  purfue  the  fame  Method  in  defend- 
ing it.  But  before  I  proceed,  I  think  it  but  fair  to 
advertife  the  Reader,  that  I  fhall  be  obliged  to  con- 
trovert fome  Things  which  have  no  more  Relation 
to  the  propofed  Epifcopate,  than  the  Difpute  be- 

'  tween 


13 


14  I  N  T  R  O  D  U  C  T  O  R  T,  fifr. 

tween  the  Two  famous  puritanical  Leaders,  Ainf- 
worth  and  Broughton^  whether  the  Colour  of  Aaron's 
Linen  Ephod  was  of  hlue^  or  a  Sea-JVater  green  -, 
which,  as  the  Hiftorian  obferves,  threw  their  Fol- 
lowers into  Parties  and  Fac^lions,  and  puzzled  ail 
Dyers  of  Amfierdam, 


.»r    'S^    <g> 

•®>  '^  ■'Sk* 


THE 


IS 


The  APPEAL  Defended. 

S  E  C  T  I  O  N    I. 


HE  Fir  ft  Se6lion  of  the  Appeal  con-  Sect. 
tains  '  a  Sketch  of  the  Arguments  I* 
'  in  Favour  of  Epifcopacy ;'  which 
was  marked  out^  with  a  View  of  en- 
abling the  Reader  to  judge  the  better 
of  the  Situation  of  the  Church  of  England  in  A- 
merica^  from  a  general  Acquaintance  with  her  Prin- 
ciples, and  the  Grounds  that  fupport  them.  But 
although  it  was  not  thought  to  be  improper,  nor 
altogether  foreign  from  the  general  Defign  of  the 
Appeal^  to  give  a  fummary  View  of  the  Evidence 
in  Favour  of  Epifcopacy-,  yet,  as  was  obferved, 
we  maintain  that  the  Validity  of  our  Plea  for  Ajiie- 
rican  Bifhops  depends  not  upon  the  abfolute  Truth, 
but  upon  our  Belief  of  the  Truth,  of  thofe  Prin- 
ciples. The  Plea  of  DiiGTenters  for  a  Toleration  in 
England^'W2iS  never  founded,!  prefume, on  the- abfo- 
lute Truth  and  Certainty  of  their  refpeclive  Tenets; 
at  leaft,  it  was  never  admitted,  on  that  Footing, 
by  thofe  in  Authority.  It  is  fuiticient  that  Men 
helieve  the  religious  Syftems  they  have  adopted  to 
be  true,  and  that  they  hold  no  Dodrines  that  are 
inconfiftent  with  the  Safety  of  the  State,  to  intitle 
them  to  a  Toleration  from  the  civil  Government : 
And  a  Toleration  im.plies,  in  the  very  Notion  of 
the  Word,  a  Liberty  for  Men  to  enjoy  the  free, 

upon 


j6  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  open  and  undifturbed  Ufe  of  fuch  Methods  of  pub- 
lic Worfhip,  and  fuch  Forms  of  ecclefiaftical  Go- 
vernment, as  belong  to  their  religious  Syllems.  If 
therefore  the  Church  of  England  in  the  American 
Colonies  has  a  Right  to  be  tolerated,  i.  e.  unlefs 
fhe  has  forfeited  the  common  Rights  of  Chriftians, 
fhe  has  a  Right  to  an  Epifcopate  ;  it  being,  as  was 
fliewed  in  fome  of  the  firfl  Se6lions  of  the  Appealy 
an  effential  Part  of  her  Confcitution. 

At  my  Entrance  upon  the  Subje6t,  I  made  the 
following  Obfervation,  '  That  the  Church  of  Eng- 

*  land    is    epifcopal,   and  confequently  holds   the 
'  Necefilty  of  Bifhops  to  govern  the  Church,  and 

*  to  confer  ecclefiaftical  Powers  \   and  for  Proof  of 
it,  refered  to  '  her  public  Offices,'  and  to  - '  the 

*  whole  Syftem  of  her  Condudl  with  Regard  to  her 
'  Clergy.'  The  Truth  of  the  Obfervation  Dr. 
Chauncey  is  pleafed  in  one  Senfe  to  allow,  and  in 
another  to  deny.  But  if  it  be  true  in  any  Senfe,  it 
is  fuificient  for  my  Pyrpofe.  If  it  be,  according  to 
the  Dodior's  Notion,  by  Virtue  only  of  the  Jus 
humanum  of  Epifcopacy,  that  Billiops  are  neceffary  •, 
ftill  the  Ends  for  which  they  are  neceffary  cannot 
be  obtained  without  them,  fo  long  as  we  are  fubjedl 
to  the  Authority  that  requires  them.  We  com- 
plain of  the  Hardfhip  of  being  obliged  to  go 
3000  Miles  for  Ordination,  with  great  Hazard  and 
Expence  :  Will  faying  that  the  Obligation  of  Epif- 
copacy in  the  Church  of  England,  is  founded  only 
on  the  national  Authority,  relieve  us,  while  we 
look  upon  ourfelves  to  be  bound  in  Duty  and  Con- 
fcience  to  obey  that  Authority  ?  Or,  v/iil  it  prove 
that  we  ought  not  to  be  relieved  ?  If  it  will  do 
neither,  we  are  ftill  in  the  fame  Condition,  and 
have  the  fame  Reafons  for  Complaint. 

But 


DEFENDED.  17 

But  I  humbly  conceive  the  Dodtor  is  greatly  Sect. 
miftaken  in  his  Opinion  of  the  Matter,  and  that,^  1- 
in  the  long  Account  he  has  undertaken  to  give  of 
the  Principles  of  our  Reformers,  if  he  will  be  fo 
good  as  for  once  to  lend  me  his  favourite  Expref- 
fion,  he  does  not  fpeak  the  Truth  of  Fa^.  As  the 
Subllance  of  this  Account  has  been  copied  from 
the  Irenicum^^  by  a  SucceiTioh,  I  had  almoft  laid 
an  uninterrupted  SuccefTion,  of  Writers  againfl  the 
Church,  including  Writers  againil  Chriftianity, 
down  to  the  JVhigs  and  Centinels  of  the  prclent 
Day  •,  and  as  I  look  upon  it  to  be  very  partial  and 
unfair,  as  well  as  injurious  to  many  excellent  Cha- 
racters, and  to  the  Church  of  England  in  general — 
I  beg  Leave  to  examine  it.  The  Subjed,  I  fear, 
may  Be  unentertaining  to  fome  of  my  Readers  •,  on 

D  which 

i 

*  The  following  juft  Account  of  the  Irenicum  has  been 
given  \>y  one  of  our  periodical  Writers.  "  I  do  not  fcruple 
**  to  declare,  that  I  look  upon  the  Irenicufn  to  have  been  a 
**  hally,  indigefted  and  partial  Account  of  Principles  and 
*'  Fads.  And  in  this  the  good  Bilhdp  would  not  have  blamed 
*'  me  ;  for  when  he  had  examined  Matters  more  thoroughly, 
**  he  looked  upon  it  in  the  fame  Light  himfelf.  His  Dcfign 
"  in  writing  it  appears  to  have  been  a  good  One  -,  which  v/as, 
*'  in  general,  to  aiUli  in  compofmg  the  religious  Differences 
**  that  then  tore  the  Nation  in  Pieces,  and  particularly,  in  Or- 
**  der  thereto,  to  demoiiih  the  y^/i  i^/'z;///^/;?  of  Prefbytery.  But 
**  his  Zeal  carried  him,  as  it  often  carries  others,  into  an 
*'  Extreme.  It  reprefented  Things  to  him  through  the  Me- 
*'  dium  of  Prejudice  ;  but  it  was  not  long,  before  he  was 
*'  able  to  correc't  his  Pv'Iiftakes,  and  to  form  a  very  diiierent 
*'  Opinion,  both  of  Principles  and  Perfons.  He  wrote  his 
"  Irenicum  at  the  Age  of  24,  and  did  not  fcruple  to  condemn. 
**  it  himfelf  afterwards,  declaring  that  there  are  mam  Things 
"  in  it,  njjhich  if  he  'were  to  tirite  again,  hdvouU  ?ict  Jay  ;  fo}}i£, 
**  ^jjhich  Jhevu  his  Youih^  and  Want  of  dti£  Cctf  deration  ;  others, 
**  --which  he  yielded,  too  far,  in  Hopes  of  gaining  the  Dijfyning 
''  Parties  to  the  Church  of  England". 

A"Whip,  ^c.  Numb.  XXXIV. 


I. 


i8  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  which  Accoiint,  their  Indulgence  will  be  efleemed 
a  peculiar  Favour. 

The  Dodtor  excepts  againft  the  Preface  to  the 
Book  of  Ordination^  as  a  Proof  that  the  Church  of 
England  is  epifcopal^  in  the  common  Senfe  of  the 
Word  ;  becaufe,  as  Profeflbr  Wigglejworth  had 
oblerved,  there  is  Reafon  to  conclude  the  Compilers 
of  it  were  of  Opinion,  that  Priejis  and  Bijhops  are 
by  God^s  Law  one  and  the  fame,  ms  was  certainly^ 
fays  Dr.  Chauncey^  the  JDo5irine  of  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  Beginning  of  the  Reformation.,  and  of 
the  Generality  of  its  pious  and  learned  Divines  for  a 
very  confiderahle  Time  afterwards.  (Page  8.)  He 
refers  to  a  Book  publifhed  in  the  Reign  of  King 
Henry  VIII,  entitled,  "  The  Instruction  of  a 
Chrillian  Man",  afterwards  altered  and  reprinted 
with  a  fomewhat  different  Title. 

Let  us  firft  fee  what  the  Preface  to  the  Ordina- 
tion Offices,  fays.     The  Words  are  thefe  :  "  It  is 
evident    to    all    Men    diligently    reading  Holy 
Scripture,  and  ancient  Authors,  that   from  the 
Apoflles  Time,  there  have  been  thefe  Orders  of 
"  Miniflers  in  Chrill's  Church ;    Bifhops,  Priefts 
*'  and   Deacons.     Which  Offices  were  evermore 
"  had    in  fuch  reverend  Eftimation,  that  no  Man 
*'  might  prefume  to  execute  any  of  them,  except 
*'  he  were  firfl  called,  tried,  examined,  and  knowQj 
to   have  fuch  Qualities  as  are  requifite  for  thej 
fame ;  and  alfo  by  publick  Prayer,  with  Impo- 
fition  of  Hands,  were   approved  and   admittec 
thereunto  by  lawful  Authority.     And  therefore, 
to  the  Intent  that  thefe  Orders  may  be  continued, 
*'  and  reverently  ufed  and  efteemed,  in  the  Church 
*'  of  England  \    no  Man  ihall   be  accounted  or 

"  taken 


cc 


DEFENDED.  19 

'  taken  to  be  a  lawful  Bifhop,  Prieft  or  Deacon,  Sect.. 
'  in  the  Church  of  England,  or  fuffered  to  execute 
'  any  of  the  faid  Functions,  except  he  be  called, 
'  tried,  examined,  and  admitted  thereunto,  accor- 
'  ding  to  the  Form  hereafter  following,  or  hath 
'  had  formerly  epifcopal  Confecra.ion,  or  Ordina- 


tion." 


If  the  Reader  now  will  carefully  confider  this 
PalTage,  let  him  fay,  whether  it  is  eafy  to  conceive 
a  more  diredl,  pofitive  and  compieat  Teftimony  in 
Favour  of  Epiicopacy,  than  is  here  given  by  the 
Compilers  of  the  Ordinal.  The  DijUnofion  of  tlie 
three  Orders,  of  Bifhops,  Priefls  and  Deacons,  is 

in  this  Preface  fully  alferted  ; the  Antiquity  of 

this  Diftindion  is  deduced  "  from  the  Apoftles 
"  Time  •," — the  Evidence  in  Favour  of  it  is  faid  to  be 
contained  in  "  holy  Scripture  and  ancient  Authors," 
— and  the  Clearnefs  of  this  Evidence  is  fuch,  that 
it  mull  appear  "  to  all  Aden  diligently  reading  holy 
"  Scripture,  &c."  In  Confequence  of  this  Do61:rine, 
"  no  Man  is  to  be  accounted  a  lawful  Biiliop,  Prieft, 
"  or  Deacon,  in  the  Church  of  England,  or  fuf- 
"  fered  to  execute  any  of  the  faid  Funftions,  ex- 
"  cept  he  be  admitted  thereunto,  according  to  the 
"  Form"  then  eftablifhed  •,  with  a  farther  Excepti- 
on in  Favour  of  thofe  only,  who  ha.d  received 
"  formerly  epifcopal  Confecration,  or  Ordination.'* 
If  the  Dodlor  can  difcover  no  more  in  thefe  De- 
clarations concerning  Epifcopacy,  than  that  they 
may  fcem  to  have  an  AJpe5l  this  Way ;  fuch  Pre- 
judice will  go  far  towards  accounting  for  the  many 
Mifreprefentations  he  has  made,  in  his  Anfzver  to 
the  Appeal.  But  to  enable  him  to  make  a  more  im- 
partial Judgment  of  the  Matter,  I  beg  of  him  to 
try  an  eafy  Experiment,   v/hich  is  no  otlier  than 

D  z  this  i 


20  T  II  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect,  this  ;  whether,  with  all  the  Explanations  and  foften* 
^'  ing  Interpretations  that  the  Words  will  adnnit  of, 
he  is  able  himfelf,  honeftly  and  confidently,  to 
fubfcribe  to  this  Declaration  of  our  firft  Reformers. 
If  he  cannot,  he  muft  allow  them  to  have  enter- 
tained other  Sentiments  of  Epifcopacy,\han  he  has 
reprefented  them  to  have  had— unlefs  he  can  fiip- 
pofe  them  to  be  guilty  of  the  grofTeft  Deceit  and 
Prevarication, 

But,  fays  the  Dodor,  "  that  Priefts  and  Bifhops 
''  were  the  fame,"  certainly  was  the  J0o5frine  of 
the  Chm'ch  of  England  in  the  Beginning   of  the  Re- 
formation ;  (Ibid.)   meaning  when  the  Ordination 
Offices  were  compofed  ;  or  it  is  impertinent  to  his 
Argument.     But  the  Dodrine  of  the  Church  of 
England  concerning  Epifcopacy,  is  certainly  to  be 
learnt  from  her  public  Offices  and  A6i:s,  rather 
than  from  the  fuppofed  Sentiments  of  Individuals. 
For  how  incredible  is  it,    that   different   Offices 
fhouid  have  been  compofed  for  the  Ordination  of 
Bifiiops  and  Priefts,  if  they  were  both  confidered 
as  being  in  Reality  but  one  Order  '^.   If  every  Prieft 
was  believed  to   be  already  a  Bifhop,  would  Men,  , 
who  had  any  Confciences,  confent  to  ad  the  folemn  ' 
Farce  of  ordaining  fuch  an  one  to  the  epifcopal 
Offi.ce,  with  Prayer  and  the  Impofition  of  Hands  ? 
Would  they  folerpnly  invoke  the  Almighty  for  his 
Ble0ing  upon  them  in  communicating  thofe  fp-iri- 
tual  Powers,  which  they  had  no  Intention  to  com- 
municate, as  the  Perfon  was  believed  to  be  fully 
invefhed  with  them  already  ?  How  injurious  to  the 
Gharaders  of  our  excellent  Reformers,  is  the  moft 
diftant  Infinuation  of  fych  Duplicity  of  Condud  I 

But 


DEFENDED.  21 

But  Hill  the  Do6lor,  it  feems,  is  clear  in  the  Sect. 
Matter  •,  The  firfl  Englijh  Reformers  certamly  were  ^* 
not  Epifcopalians.  If  pofitive  AlTertions  are  to  be 
admitted  as  Evidence  in  this  Difpute,  I  can  pro- 
duce, from  the  moil  refpe6table  Authors,  innu- 
merable Witnefles  on  the  other  Side.  Bifhop  Ken- 
net^  as  moderate  a  Man,  as  candid  a  Writer,  and 
as  well  acquainted  with  the  Englijh  ecclefiaftical 
Hiftory,  as  Doftor  Chauncey^  fays,  that  "  the  Su- 
^'  periority  of  Bifhops  is  one  of  theTwo  diftinguijhing 
*'  Principles  of  our  Reformation,"  the  "  Supremacy 
*^  of  Kings"  being  the  other  -,  "  for  both  which  our 
''  conformable  Divines  have  been  continual  Advo- 
"  cates."*  To  this  Teftimony  I  will  add  another 
from  Doctor  Mojheim.  This  learned  Foreigner, 
fpeaking  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the  XVIth 
Century,  amongft  other  Things,  fays,  it  "  con- 
"^  ftantly  infifted  on  the  divine  Origin  of  its  Go- 
*'  vernment  and  Difcipline."-f  It  is  fuppofed  thefe 
two  Aflertions  will  be  allowed  to  have  as  much 
Weight,  as  the  Dodor's. 

But  let  us  proceed  to  Evidence  of  another  Na- 
ture. The  Book  intitled  "  The  godly  and  pious 
"  Institution  of  a  Chriftian  Man,"  was  publilhed 
1537,  in  the  early  Infancy^  or  rather  foon  after  the 
firft  Conception^  of  the  Reformation.  It  was  drawn 
up  by  Cranmer  and  others,  agreed  to  by  bothHoufes 
of  Convocation,  publiihed  with  the  King's  Appro- 
bation, and  intended  as  a  Standard  of  Doftrine  for 
the  Bifhops  and  Clergy.  The  Book  itfelf  I  have 
never  feen  ;  but  Collier  has  given  an  Jbjira^  of  the 

moil 

*  In  his  Hijforical  Account  of  the  Difcipline  and  Govern- 
ment of  the  Church  of  England, 
t  Eccle.  Hiit.  Vol.  II.  p.  231. 


I. 


22  THEAPPEAL 

Stcr.  mofl  material  Parts  of  it.  In  this  Abftradt  there  is. 
nothing  like  what  the  Do6tor  would  prove  from  it ; 
but  there  is  fomething  extremely  unlike  it  in  the 
following  PalTage  :  "  They  proceed  (fays  Collier^. 
fpeaking  of  the  Authors  of  that  Book)   "  to  a 
"  more  particular  Explanation  of  the  Authority  of 
"  the  Clergy,  and  divide  it  into  two  Branches,  Po- 
"  teftasOrdtniSy  etPoteftas  Jurifdi5fiGnis.  Concerning 
*■'  the  Firft,  not  being  contefted^  they  fay  nothing ; 
"  the  Latter,  touching  Jurifdidlion  committed  by 
*'  God  to  the  Hierarchy,  they  throw  it  into  three 
*'  Subdivifions.  By  the  Firft,  they  are  impowered 
to  reprove  Immorality  and  Mifbelief,  and  to  ex- 
communicate the  Obftinate  and  incorrigible.~By 
the  fecond  Branch  of  Jurifdidion,  Bishops  are 
authorifed  by  our  Saviour  to  continue  the  Suc^ 
CESSION  and  perpetuate  the  Hierarchy.     They 
are  the  Judges  of  the  Qualifications  for  Prieft- 
hood,  and  may  admit  or  refufe  as  they  think  fit.— 
A  third  Branch  of  Jurifdidion  belonging  to  Biftiops. 
*'  and  Priefts,  comprehends  the  Power  of  making 
"  Canons  for  the  Difcipline  and  Service   of  the 
*'  Church."  The  Hiftorian,  at  the  Conclufion  of 
his  Abftradl,  gives  the  Lift  of  Subfcribers,    and 
takes  Leave,  with  the  follov/ing  Remark  :  "  This 
"  Book,  in  the  Sacrament  of  Orders.,  declares  the 
"  Clergy  have  their  Commiflion  from  God  Almigh- 
"  ty,  and  by  Confequence,  that  their  Authority  is 
"  no  Grant  of  the  Crown'* 


cc 
cc 

cc 


cc 


A  few  Years  afterwards  was  publilhed,  "  a  ne- 
"  cefTary  Bod;rine  and  Erudition  of  a  Chriftian 
"  Man,"  to  which  the  King  himlclf  wrote  a  Pre- 
face. It  was  for  Subftance  much  the  fame  with  the 
Institution,  but  enlarged  and  altered  in  feveral 
Particulars :  From  whence  it  is  evident  that  at  this 

Period, 


DEFENDED.  2^ 

Period,  the  religious  Principles  of  the  Nation  were  Sect. 
in  an  unfettled,  flii6tuating  State.  In  the  Account  L 
given  of  the  Erudition  by  the  fame  Hiilorian, 
there  is  fomething  indeed  to  the  Do6lor's  Purpofe  ; 
ibr  therein  we  are  told,  that  "  after  mention  made 
*'  of  the  Appointment  of  Deacons"  in  this  Book, 
■*'  it  is  fubjoined,  that  the  Scripture  fpeaks  exprefsly 
"  of  no  more  than  the  two  Orders  of  Priefls  and 
"  Deacons."  Were  we  to  flop  here,  we  fhould  infer 
that  the  Reformers  at  this  Time,  were  not  proper- 
ly Epifcopalians,  but  Prefbyterians.  But  in  another 
PafTage  under  the  fame  Head,  they  have  the  Ap- 
pearance, not  of  Prefbyterians,  but  of  Epifcopa- 
lians. Take  the  Words  of  my  Author :  "  The 
*'  Erudition  makes  Orders^one  of  the  feven  Sa- 
■*'  craments,  and  defines  it  a  Gift  of  Grace  for  Ad- 
minifbration  in  the  Church  •,  that  it  is  conveyed 
by  Confecration  and  Impofition  of  the  Bi/hop's 
Hands ;  that  in  the  Beginning  of  Chriflianity, 
this  Character  was  given  by  the  Apofbles.  The 
Proof  is  drawn  from  the  Epiflles  of  St.  Paul  to 
Timothy  and  Titus.^'  How  to  reconcile  thefe  two 
PalTages,  may  be  difficult  •,  and  until  this  be  done, 
they  can  prove  but  little  on  either  Side.  Collier 
fays,  that  "  under  thole  called  Prieils  or  Prefbyters, 
this  Book  fuppofes  the  epifcopal  Charadler  was 
meant  -,  for,  that  thefe  two  Orders  were  diftinct 
and  fubordinate,  is  plain  from  this  Erudition.** 
He  concludes  with  obferving,  that  "  this  lafl  Book 
*'  does  not  fland  upon  fo  ilrong  an  Authority  as 
*'  the  former.  The  Institution  was  the  Ai;l  of  the 
*'  whole  Clergy,  and  fubfcribed  by  both  Houfes  of 
*'  Convocation."  But  the  "  neceffary  Erudition," 
was  drawn  up  only  by  a  Committee  of  "  the  King's 
*'  Nomination." 

But 


^4  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  But  the  true  State  of  the  Cafe  appears  to  me 
to  have  been  this :  At  the  Time  of  the  Erudi- 
tion, Cranmer  and  his  AfTociates  were  generally 
agreed  in  thefe  two  main  Points  \  that  the  national 
Religion  was  grofsly  corrupted,  and  that  a  public 
Reformation  was  neceflary.  But  how  far  either  was 
the  Cafe,  was  the  Work  of  Time  to  determine. 
Luther  and  Calvin  had  made  great  Progrefs  in  Ger- 
many and  fome  Places  adjacent  •,  but  they  differed 
confiderably  in  their  Syllems ;  neither  of  which 
could  fafely  be  adopted,  without  a  careful  Exami- 
nation. Befides,  in  the  Heat  of  their  Conteft,  they 
were  fuppofed  to  have  run  into  fome  Extremes, 
which  the  Engliflj  Divines  judged  it  prudent  to  a- 
void.  Our  Reformers  therefore  were  refolved  to 
proceed  with  the  utmoft  Caution.  And  the  Me- 
thod they  appear  to  have  purfued  was,  to  conlider 
one  Dodtrine  after  another  with  the  clofeil  Attenti- 
on, until  the  whole  Syilem  fhould  be  examined^ 
and  placed  on  the  fure  Bafis  of  Scripture  Authori- 
ty. While  this  flow  and  important  Work  was  going 
on,  the  Institution  and  Erudition  were  pub- 
lifhed  for  temporary  Ufe.  Some  of  the  Dodrines 
in  Difpute  between  the  Church  of  Rome  and  the 
German  Reformers,  had  been  fully  canvaiTed  and 
determined  by  Cranmer  and  his  Friends.  Others 
v/crc  not  yet  thoroughly  difcuffed  5  among  which 
mud  be  reckoned  that  of  ecclefiailical  Government. 
This  may  fairly  be  concluded  from  the  ^.eftions 
propofed  to  an  Affemhly  of  select  Divines^  as  the 
Do&cr  properly  calls  them  p.  9  ♦,  to  which  ^lefli- 
ons  they  gave  in  fever  ally  their  Refolutions  in  Paper  Sy 
all  whofe  Judgments  were  accurately  fummed  up^  and 
fet  down  by  the  ArchbifJjop  of  Canterbury  himfelf. 
For  it  v/as  at  this  Time,  and  not  ten  Years  after- 
Vv'ards,   in  -the  Reign  of  Edward  Wy  as  Dodlof 

CJjaunceyy 


DEFENDED.  25 

Chauncey,  following  his  blind  Guide  the  Irenicum^   Sect. 
afTerts,  that  thofe  ^eftions  were  given  out  for  Dif-      ^' 
cuflion,  as  is  plain  from  Bifhop  Buy'fiet, 

At  this  Stage  of  the  Reformation  therefore 
it  is  no  Wonder,  that  we  meet  with  fome  crude 
ExpefTions,  relating  to  Epifcopacy ;  as  well  as  to 
many  other  Matters  of  the  higheft  Importance. 
The  PrepofTefTions  of  a  Popijh  Education  flill  ope- 
rated in  the  Minds  of  thefe  honell  Searchers  for 
Tmth  ;  and  it  was  owing  perhaps  more  to  the  Force 
of  thefe  PrepofTefTions,  than  to  any  other  Caufe, 
that  fome  of  them  have  ufed  Expreflions,  which 
have  fmce  been  conflrued  to  imply  their  having 
fome  Doubts  concerning  the  Superiority  of  Biihops 
over  Prefbyters.  The  PopiJJj  Schoolmen  and  Ca~ 
nonifis  had  been  for  fome  Ages  endeavouring  to  de- 
flroy  the  Diflindion  between  the  two  Orders  •,  of 
which  Bifhop  Burnet  gives  a  particular  Account*, 
concluding  it  in  thefe  Words  :  "  On  this  I  have 
infifled  the  more,  that  it  may  appear  how  little 
they  have  confidered  Things,  who  are  fo  far  car- 
ried with  their  Zeal  againft  the  ellablifhed  Go- 
"  vefnment  of  the  Church,  as  to  make  Ufe  of 
'-^  fome  PafTages  of  the  Schoolmen  and  Canoniils 
"  that  deny  them  to  be  diltinct  Orders  ;  for  thefe 
"  are  the  very  Dregs  of  Pcpery^  the  one  raifmg  the 
^'  Priefls  higher  for  the  Sake  of  Tranfubflantiation, 
the  other  pulling  the  Bifhops  lower  for  the  Sake 
of  the  Pope's  Supremacy,  and  by  fuch  Means 
bringing  them  almofl  to  an  Equality."  The  like 
Obfervationwas  before  made  by  an  eminent  Archbi- 
fhop,whofays  :  "We  mayjuftly  afcribe  the  reviving 
"  of  the  Aerian  Herefy  in  thefe  latter  Days,  to  the 
"  Dilpenfations  of  the  Court  of  Rome^^ho  licenfed 

E  "  ordinary 

'^  Hi.ft.  Ref.  Vol.  I.  p.  366. 


4C 


(C 


26  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.   «'  ordinary  Priefts   to  ordain^  and  cGUJirm^  and  do 
^*      "  the  molt  eflentiai  Offices  of  Biihops.     So  their 
Schools  do  teach  us,  a  Trieji  may  he  the  extraor- 
dinary Minifter  of  Priefthoody  end  inferior  Orders 
by  the  Delegation  of  the  Pope.     Again,  "ihe  Pope 
*'  may  confer  the  Power  of  Confrridticn  upon  afimple 
*"•  Priefl.     By  fuch  exhorbitant  Praclices  as  thefe, 
*f  they  chalked  out  a  Way  to  Innovators.     And  yet 
*'  they  are  not  able  to  produce  a  Precedent  of  fuch 
"  Difpenfation  throughout  the  primitive  Times*." 

But  to  come  to  the  ^leflions  and  Refolutions^ 
Extra6ls  from  which  make  fo  great  a  Figure  in  the 
Irenicum  :  The  Manufcript  is  publifhed  at  large  by 
Burnet  -[-,  excepting  an  OmiiTion  to  be  mentioned 
prefently.  Therein  we  find  Cranmer\  Anfwer  to  the 
loth  QiiefLion,  in  the  Words  quoted  by  the  Dodlor ; 
but  the  Reader  will  not  forget  the  l^ime  of  his  giv- 
ing this  Anfwer,  Vv^hich  was  about  ten  Years  before 
our  prefent  Oiiices  for  Ordination  were  compofed. 
However  ftrange  Cranmer''^  Opinion  may  appear  to 
have  been  at  this  Time,  there  is  (Irong  Proof  that 
he  altered  it  imjmediately.    For  in  the  fame  Copy 
<5f  Qiieftions  and  Refolutions,  Dr.  Leightonh  An- 
fwer to  the   I  i  th  QjLiefton  is  :    "I  luppofe  that  a 
Bilhop  hath  Authority  of  God,  as  his  Miniiler, 
by  Scripture   to  make  a  Priefl ;  but  he  ought 
not  to  admit  any  Man  to  be  a  Priefl,  and  confe- 
crate  him,  or  to  appoint  him  to  any  Minifhry  in 
"  the  Church,  without  the  Prince's   Licence  and 
"  Confent.     And  that  any  other  Man  hath  Au- 
*^'  thority  to  nvike  a  Prieii  by  Scripture,  I  have  not 
^'  read,,  nor  any  Example  therof."    To  the  12th 
Qiieilion  Leighton  anfwers  :  "  1  fuppofe  that  there 

"    IS 

'  Brhnil-ali's  Works,  p.  431. 

f  Hii>.  Rci.    Vol.  I.  Ccikciion,  p.  2ci. 


DEFENDED.  27 

"  is^a  Confecration  required,  as  by  Impolrtio.n  of  Sect. 
*'  Hands  -,  for  fo  we  be  taiicrht  in  the  EnfamDle  of  iht  ^• 
"  Apoftles."  Nov/  Durellm  his  Vindicia  %s,  that: 
having  had  an  Opportunity  of  exazr.ining  the  ori- 
gmal  Manufcript,  he  found  xh2^  Crmmer  g^ve  Mr 
Confent  to  thefe  two  Opinions  of  Leightcn,  fiiblcrl!> 
ing  to  each  Th  :  Cantuarien/is  -,  which  very  maten?! 
Information  is  omited  by  Bifhop  Burnet'^  Why 
miingfieet  left  out  this  PaiTage  is  plain  ;  it  inter- 
fered with  the  Defign  of  his  Irenicum  :  But  why 
Burnet^  omited  it  is  doubtful.  For  that  he  had  no 
Intention  to  tranfmit  Cranmer's  Character  to  Pofte- 
rity  as  Eraftirm,  is  evident  from  his  Remark  in  the 
Body  of  his  Hiftory.  "  In  Crajimer's  Paper,  fays 
"  he,  Ibme  fingular  Opinions  of  his  about  the  Na^ 
"  ture  of  ecciefiaftical  Offices  will  be  found ;  but 
"  as  they  are  delivered  by  him  wi;h  all  poiTibie 
"  Modelly,  fo  they  are  not  eftabliHied  as  the  Doc- 
"  trine  of  the  Church,  but  laid  afide  as  particular 
"  Conceits  of  his  ov/n,  and  it  feems  that  after- 
zvards  he  changed  his  Opinion.  For  he  fubfcribed 
the  Book  that  was  foon  after  fet  out,  which  is 
dtremy  contrary  to  thofe  Opinions  fet  down  in 
'^  thefe  Papers."  § 

Dr.  Chaunccy  proceeds  :  The  BifJocp  of  St.  Afaph, 
Br.  rhirlehy^  Br.Redmayn  and  Cox ^ ere  all  (fthe  fan  e 
Opinion  with  the  Archbifljop,  viz.  that  "  Biihops  and 
^•|  Priefls  were  at  one  Time,  and  were  not  twoThino-s, 
^^  but  one  Office  in  the  Beginning  of  Cbriil's  Reli- 
"  gion."  I  fee  no  great  Heterodoxy  in  this  Opinion, 
if  properly  explained.  It  is  now  generally  aareed  by 
the  Advocates  for  Epifcopacy,  that/>  the  Beginning 
of  Chrifs  Religion,  Biihops,  and  Prieils  or  Prefby- 
ters,  were  fynonymous  Terms :  Confequently,  they 


*  Lowth,  on  the  Subjea  of  Church. Fo^^r,•  p:  4^4. 
-t  Vol.  I.  p.  289.  >  f   t  i- 


were 


jj8  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  were  at  one  Time^  and  not  two  Things.    But  the 
^-       Word  Bijhop  in  the  nth  Quellion,  feems  to  have 
been  underftood  ii)  its  appropriated  Senfe.     The 
Qiieftion  is.  Whether  a  Bijloop  hath  Authority  to 
make  a  Prieft  hy  the  Scripture.,  or  no  ?  And  whether 
any  other  but  only  a  Bijhop  may  make  a  Prieft  ?    To 
this  Dr.  Cox   anfwers  :  "  Bifliops  have  Authoritv, 
''  as  is  aforefaid,  of  the  Apoftles,  in  the  loth  Quei- 
*'  tion,  to  make  Priefts,  except  in  Cafes  of  great 
*'  Neceffity."  In  his  Anfwer  to  the  loth  Quellion, 
p  which  he  refers,  he  had  made  this  Diftindion, 
Bifi)ops  as  they  be  now,  i.  e.  as  fuperior  to  Prefby- 
ters  ',  in  which  Senfe   therefore  he   afferts   in  this 
Place,  that  they  have  Authority  to  make  Priefts. 
Dr.  Redmayn   anfwers   the  Queftion  thus  :    "  To 
"  the  firft  Part,  I  anfwer.  Yea  ;  for  fo  it  appear- 
"  eth,  "Tit.  i.  and  i  Tim.  v.  with  other  Places  of 
"  Scripture.    But  whether  any  other  but  only  a  Bi- 
*'  (hop  may  make  a  Prieft,  I  have  not  read,  but 
«  by  fmgular  Privilege  of  God.~As  for  making,^ 
'     ^'  that  is'  to   fay,    ordaining  and  confecrating  of 
"  Priefts,  I  think  it  fpecially  belongeth  to  the  Of- 
"  fice  of  a  Bifhop,  as  far  as  can  be  fliewn  by  Scrip- 
*'  ture,  or  any  Example,  as  I  fuppofe  from  tlie 
"  Bee-inning ;"  and  with  him  agree  Thirlehy.,  Sym- 
fnons^    Rohertfon^    Leighton  and  others.    In  fhort, 
they  generally  agree  in   anfwering  affirmatively  to 
-    the  firft  P^rt,  and  negatively  to  the  fecond  Part,  oi 
the  Queftion  •,  an  Exception  being  made  by  fome 
of  them  for  Cafes  of  great  Necefiity. 

But  let  us  return  to  Dr.  Chauncey  :  In  this  ftayne 
Reign  (of  Edward  VI.)  in  a  public  Declaration., 
fubfcribed  by  the  Archbiftdops  of  Canterbury  and  York., 
eleven  BiJJoops.,  and  many  other  B o 31  or s  and  Civilians., 
it  is  e>:prefsly  ajferted,  that '_'  in  the  New-Teftament 
-         ^  ^  ■"  "^  "no 


DEFENDED.  29 

"-^  no  mention  is  made  of  any  Degrees,  or  Difdnc-  Sect. 
"  tion  of  Orders,  but  only  of  Deacons  or  Miniilers,  ^* 
"  and  of  Priefts  or  Bifhops  -,''  for  which  v/e  are  re- 
fered  to  Bttrnet  and  NeaL  I  fhall  not  trouble  my- 
felf  or  my  Reader  with  Neal^  who  generally  follows 
the  Irenicum  in  thefe  Matters.  As  to  Burnet^  upon 
confulting  him  I  find  the  Declaration  here  menti- 
oned, .copied  from  a  Manufcript  in  the  Cotton  Li- 
brary*. It  is  entitled,  jl  Declaration  made  of 
the  FunBions  and  divine  Inftitution  of  BifJjcps  and 
Priefis.  But  how  the  Doclor  could  afcribe  it  to  the 
Reign  of  Edward  VI,  after  examining  Biiliop  Bur- 
net on  the  Subje6t,  is  inconceivable.  It  has  evi- 
dent internal  Marks  of  its  being  of  a  more  ancient 
Date  ;  and  the  Biihop  puts  it  as  far  back  in  the 
Reign  of  Henry  VIII,  as  1538  at  leafl,  and  proves 
that  it  could  not  have  been  made  later  than  the  Be- 
ginning of  the  Year  he  alTigns.  For  it  v^as  fub- 
fcribed  by  Edward  Fox^  Biihop  of  Hereford^  v/ho 
died  in  May  1538.  This  Declaratlt)n  therefore  v/ill 
not  be  admitted  as  an  Evidence,  that  the  Refor- 
mers in  the  Reign  of  Edward  VI,  believed  diffe- 
rently from  what  they  exprelTed  in  the  pubhc 
QfHces. 

Our  Adverfaries  have  often  boafted  of  late,  that 
our  great  Reformer  Crajimer  was  altogether  in  their 
Sentiments,  concerning  the  Origin  and  Nature  of 
ppifcopacy.  But  I  trull  fufficient  has  been  faid  to 
prove,  that  they  have  no  juft  Reafons  for  Triumph, 
on  this  Account.  Time  was  when  Cramner  was  a 
Papiil,  and  believed  the  Do6lrine  of  Tranfubflanti- 
ation.  This,  with  the  other  diftinguiiliing  Doctrines 
jof  Popery,  he  renounced  by  Degrees ;  in  Confe- 
quence  of  an  honefl"  and  faithful  Examination  of 

them 

f  Vol.  I.  Addenda,  p.  321. 


THE    APPEAL 

them  in  SuccefTion,  one  after  another.     Is  it  then 
fair,  or  can  it  be  reconciled  with  that  common  Juf- 
tice  which  is  due  to  him  as  a  Man,  to  fay  nothing 
of  his  eminent  Chara6ler,  to  alledge  againft  him  in 
the  Reign  of  Edward  VI,  after  he  had  firmly  fet- 
led  himfelf  upon  proteflant  Principles,    any  Opi- 
nions he  entertained  before  he  was  a  Proteftant  ? 
At  the  Time  indeed  when  he  exprefied  himfelf,  in 
the  Manner  that  has  been  mentioned,  on  the  Sub- 
jedl  of  Epifcopacy,  he  was   not  a  Papift  -,  but  it 
may  be  faid  with  equal  Truth  and  Propriety,  that 
he  was  not  yet  a  compleat  Proteftant.   In  Regard 
to  fome  Points,  he  was  ftill  under  the  Influence  of 
old  Prejudices,  and  of  the  Im.preffions  he  had  re- 
ceived from  the  Schoolmen  and  Canonifts  ;  from 
v/hich  however  it  was  not  long  before  he  perfe6bly 
difeno;ao;ed  himfelf.     After  the   Time  of  his  fub- 
fcribing  to  Dr.  Leighton's  Opinions  concerning  E- 
pifcopacy,  I  find  in  him  no  Fluctuation  of  Princi- 
ples •,  but  many  Proofs  appear  of  his  fettled  and 
fteady  Belief  that  Bifhops  are  fuperior  to  Prefbyters, 
by  apoftolical  Inftitution.    In  1548,  he  compiled  a 
Catechifm^  or  ''  large  Inftru6lion  of  young  Perfons 
*'  in  the  Grounds  of  the  Chriftian  Religion ;"  in 
which,  if  we  may  believe  Bifliop  Burnet^  "  he  jully 
"  owns    the    divifie    Inftitution  of    Biftiops    and 
"  Priefts."  In  this  Book  the  Archbiftiop  alfo  pub- 
liftied  his   Sermon,  of  the  Authority   of  the  KeySy 
Upon  Rom,  x.  13,   14,    15.  in  which  Sermon  his 
Notions  of  Epifcopacy  and  Church-Government  are 
fo  high,  that  even  the  highflymg  Dr.  Ilicks^  as  fome 
have  called  him,  reprinted  it  at  large,  in  his  Pre- 
face to  7ke  divine  Right  of  Epifcopacy   ajferted. 
Now  let  it  be  remembred,  that   this  Sermon  was 
publiftied  in  154S— that  the  Ordinal  w^s  compiled 
in  1550 — and  that  Cranmer  ^2i%  the  principal  Perfon 

concerned 


DEFENDED.  31 

concerned  in  that  Work  -,  and  then  let  it  be  judged,  "Sect. 
whether,  according  to  my  Anfwe^er^  the  Confidera- 
tion  who  were  the  Compilers  of  that  JVork^  will  in 
the  leaft  contribute  to  overthrow  my  Pofition, 
'  that  the  Church  of  England  is  epifcopal,  and 
'-  confequently  holds  the  NecelTity  of  Bifhops  to 
*  govern  the  Church,  and  to  confer  eccleliailical 
**  Powers.' 

From  Cra?imer^  I  might  go  on  to  vindicate  the 
Sincerity  of  the  other  Compilers  of  the  Ordinal^ 
from  the  fame  injurious  Impeachment ;  but  I  have 
already  exceeded  the  Limits  I  propofed  for  this 
Subjed:,  and  I  imagine  what  has  been  offered  is  fuf- 
ficient  to  fatisfy  all  reafonahle  Perfons — and  it  is 
vain  to  attempt  the  Con  virion  of  others. 

From  the  Reign  of  Edward  VI,  the  Do6tor 
carries  us  to  the  Days  of  ^een  Elizabeth^  p.  11  \ 
when  according  to  him,  //  was  only  determined^  in 
"  the  Articles  of  Religion  agreed  upon^  to  be  agree - 
*'  able  to  God's  Word  •,"  which  feems  to  be  all 
that  he  can  difcover  in  Favour  of  Epifcopacy.  But 
does  he  not  fpeak,  in  this  very  Pafiage,  of  Qiieen 
Elizabeth's  Re-efiablifhment  of  Church  Government  f 
Now  what  Form  of  Church-Government  did  She 
re-eft ablifh^  but  that  Form  which  had  been  before 
eilablilhed  by  Edward  VI  ?  And  has  not  this  been 
fhewn  to  be  truly  epifcopal  ?  Is  not  then  the  Re- 
eflablifhment  of  Epifcopacy  fomewhat  more  than  a 
bare  Determination^  mentioned  in  the  Articles  of 
Religion  agreed  upon  ;  altho'  it  is  there  only  faid  to 
be  "  agreeable  to  God's  Word  ?"  Neither  is  this, 
as  the  Author  of  the  Irenicum  thought  it,  a  low 
and  diminutive  Exprejfion^  when  advanced  in  Oppofi- 
tion  to  thofewho  denied  it  to  be  "  agreeable  to  God's 

"  Word." 


32  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  «  Word."  For  if  Epifcopacy  be  agreeable  to  Scrips 
ture,  fo  far  as  any  Form  of  Church-Government  is 
diredlly  cppcfite  to  Epifcopacy,  it  is  contrary  to 
Scripture.  If  this  were  faid  of  that  particular 
Form  for  which  the  Do6lor  is  an  Advocate,  how- 
ever diminutive  he  might  eiteem  it,  I  fancy  he  would 
not  confider  it  as  a  low  Expreffion. 

But  we  need  not  have  been  detained  with  the 
foregoing  Particulars  ;  for  we  are  more  roundly 
told,  p.  12,  that /^/V  Notion  of  the  Right  of  Bijhops 
to  govern  and  ordain^  as  being  Officers  in  the  Churchy 
fuperior  to  Prefhyters  by  divine  Appointynent^  was^  as 
the  excellent  Mr.  J.  Ov/eny^j^,  "  first  promoted  in 
"  the  Church  of  England,  by  Archbifliop  Laud.'* 
This,  Dr.  Chauncey  calls  the  plain  ^ruth.,  and  would 
doubtlefs  have  us  receive  it  as  the  whole  Truth,  and 
nothing  but  the  Truth.  But  of  dW  plain  Truths,  this 
is  the  moil  myfterious.  There  may  indeed  be  fome 
fecret  Meaning  in  the  Word  promoted.,  which  I  do 
not  com.prehend  •,  but  until  it  be  unfolded,  I  mufl 
take  the  Liberty  to  believe  that  the  national  Efta- 
bhjfhment  of  this  Dodrine,  again  and  again,  and 
making  it  a  fundamental  Principle  of  our  Reforma- 
tion, was  doing  fomething  to  promote  it.  If  the 
Meaning  be,  that  none  before  Archbifhop  Laud-, 
contended  for  the  Superiority  of  Bifhops  over 
Prefbyters  by  divine  Appointment.,  in  their  Writings 
or  publick  Difputations  -,  ftill  I  muft  deny  it,  as  I 
am  able  to  produce  abundant  Evidence  to  the  con- 
trary. Among  the  firit  Set  of  Englilh  Reformers, 
the  DovStrine  of  Epifcopacy  was  not  difputed,  other- 
wife  than  in  the  Way  of  friendly  Enquiry,  which 
foon  ended  in  a  general  Confent  to  the  Do6trine. 
Soon  after  the  Accefhon  of  Queen  Elizabeth.,  it 
was  received  and  eilablifned  as  a  Dodrine  fairly 

fettled 


DEFENDED.  .  33 

fettled  by  the  venerable  Reformers  ofKmgEdward's  Sect. 
Reign,  without  a  particular  Re-examination.  V/hen      I- 
.    the  Englilh  Exiles  returned,  amongftthe  foreio-n 
Prejudices  imported  from  Frankfort  and  Geneva,  we 
find  no  fixed  Difaffedion  towards  epilcopal  Govern- 
ment.    For  even  Calvin  himfelf  had  no  Obje6lions 
to  a  moderate   Epifcopacy,  fuch    as    that  of  the 
Church  of  England,     Some  of  thefe  Perfons  fcrup- 
ied  wearing  the  Habits,  objected  to  the  Terms  of 
Conformity,  and  caviled  about  fome  Parts   of  the 
Liturgy.     For  feveral  Years  thefe  were  the  only 
Subjedls  of  Debate  between  the  Church  and  the 
Puritans,  as  they  were  now  called ;  and  it  is  not  to 
be  expeded  that,  during  this  Period,  we  Ihould 
find  any  elaborate  Defences  of  epifcopal  Govern- 
ment.    But  afterwards,  when  the  Hierarchy  came 
to  be  formally  attacked  by  Cartwrlght,  Udal,  Penry 
and  the  other  IFhigs  and  Centineh  of  that  Reign' 
It  was  vigorouHy  defended  upon  the  Footing  of  a 
divine  Appointment.     Even  Mr.  Neal  allows,  that 
the  Validity  of  Ordination  by  Prefbyters  began  to 
be  difputed  and  denied,  towards  the  Middle  of  this 
Reign      «  IVhitgift,  fays  he,  was  the  firfl  that  de- 
"  tended  the  Hierarchy,  from  the  Pradice  of  the 
third,  fourth,  and  fifth  Centuries,  when  the  Ro- 
man Empire  became    Chriflian;  but    Bancroft 
divided  off  the  Biihops  from  the  Prielthood,  and 
advanced  them  into  a  fuperior  Order  by  divine 
Right,  with  the  fole  Power  of  Ordination,   and 
the  Keys  of  Difcipline  ;  fo  that  from  his  Time 
"  there  were  reckoned  Three  Orders  of  Clergy  in 
"  the    Englijh    Hierarchy,    viz.    Biiliops,    Priefts 
'^'^  and  Deacons."     He  aifo  fays,  "  die  Qiieen  and 
"  the  later  Bifiiops  would  not  part  with  a  Pin  out 
\/'  of  the  Hierarchy  f."  From  whence  it  isev-dent, 

F  that 

t  Hiftory  of  the  Puritans,  Vol.  I.  p.  467,  Dublin  Edit. 


<( 


iC 


34  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect,  that  whatever  the  excellent  Mr.  J.  Owen  may  have 
thought,  or  Dr.  Chauncey  may  now  think,  it  v,^as 
not  the  Opinion  of  their  great  puritanical  Hifto- 
rian,  that  the  Do6lrine  of  Epilcopacy  by  divine 
Appointment^  v/as  fir  si  pr  emoted  in  the  Church  cf 
England  by  Archbifiop  Laud, 

The  firfl  regular  Attack  upon  the  Hierarchy  of 
the  Church  of  England  was  made  by  the  Puritans 
in  1572,  in  their  Adynonition  to  the  Parliament  •,  the 
Defign  of  which,  among  other  Things,  was  to 
fubvert  the  eccleliallical  Government  by  Biihops. 
Dr.  Whitgift^  then  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  Uni- 
veriity  of  Cambridge^  was  thought  to  be  a  proper 
Perfon  to  give  "  an  Anfwer"  to  it.  Upon  this 
Service  he  was  put  by  Archbifhop  Parker^  and  he 
performed  it  with  great  Approbation  and  Appkufe. 
Strype  fays  of  his  Anfwer,  that  it  was  an  "  excel- 
"  lent  Bock,  containing  a  very  learned  and  fatis- 
"  fadtor/  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England^ 
"  and  the  Ufages  thereof,  and  efpecially  o'f  the 
"  Government  of  it  by  Bifnopst."  We  alfo  learn 
from  the  fame  Hiftorian,  that  "  as  Archbifhop 
*'  Parker  was  the  chief  Perfon  that  fet  IVhitgift 
"  about  this  Work,  fo  he  gave  him  confiderable 
"  AlTiftance  therein,  and  the  feveral  Parts  of  the 
*'  Copy,  as  it  was  finifhed,  v/ere  fent  to  him  from 
"  Time  to  Time,  to  reviev/  :  And  Cooper^  Billiop 
"  of  Lincoln^  another  of  our  learnedeft  Bifhops, 
"  together  with  other  Bifhops  and  learned  Men, 
"  were  confalted  withal. — So  that  this  Book  may 
"  be  juflly  efceemed  and  applied  to,  as  one  of  the 
"  public  BooIls  of  the  Church  of  England^  con- 
*'  cerning  her  ProfefTion  and  Principles  ;  being  of 
"  the  like  Authority,  in  Refped  to  its  Worfnipi 

"  and 

X  Life  of  Whit  gift,  p.  33. 


DEFENDED.  35 

"  and  Government,  in  Oppofition  to  the  Dlfcipli-  Sect. 
"  narians,  as  BiHiop  JevjeVs  Apclogy  and  Defence,  !• 
"  in  Refpe6l  to  the  Reformation  and  Doilrine  of 
"  it,  in  Oppofition  to  the  Papiftsl]."  Upon  vvhat 
Principle  he  defended  the  Governmaent  of  the 
Church  by  Bifnops,  we  may  learn  from  Sir  F. 
Knollys^  a  great  Patron  of  the  PuritPuns  •,  who 
fome  Years  afterwards,  fpeaking  of  Dr.  JVhitgift''^ 
Writings  in  this  Controverfy,  complains  that  he 
''  had  claimed,  in  the  Right  of  all  Bifliops,  a  Su- 
"  periority  belonging  to  them,  over  all  the  inferior 
"  Clergy  from  God's  own  Ordinanc.e§."  In  1583 
Dr.  JVbitgift  was  promoted  from  the  See  of  IVcr- 
cefter  to  that  of  Canterbury^  in  which  he  continued 
for  many  Years,  giving  frequent  Proofs  of  his 
fleady  Adherence  to  the  fame  Principles  with  Re- 
gard to  Epifcopacy.  I  will  content  myfelf  with 
laying  before  the  Reader,  the  following  remarkable 
Inftance.  In  1593,  he  wrote  a  long  Letter  to  Beza^ 
expollulating  with  him  for  intermedling,  in  the 
Manner  he  had  done,  in  the  Difputes  between  the 
Church  of  England  and  the  Puritans  •,  in  which 
Letter  is  a  Railage,  v/hich  I  v/ill  take  the  Freedom 
to  recommend  to  the  ferious  Attention  of  Dr. 
Chauncey^  as  it  will  tend  to  re6tify  fom.e  of  his  No- 
tions concerning  Epifcopacy.  "  We  make  no 
"  Doubt,"  fays  the  Archbilhop  to  that  eminent 
Proteftant,  "  but  that  the  epifcopal  Degree,  which 
"  we  bear,  is  an  Inflitution  apofcolical  and  divine  ; 
"  and  fo  always  hath  been  held  by  a  continual 
"  Courfe  of  Times  from  the  Apofdes  to  this  very 
"  Age  of  ours.  For  as  for  what  you  feem  to  hint 
"  out  of  Hierom -divA  Auguftine  \  as  though 'Cufliom 
"  only,  and  that  but  latter,  prefered  BiPxicps*  to 
"  Prefbyters  ;  it  is  a  Wonder  to  me,  that  you  fliould 

F  2  "  wreft 

!j  Life  of  Whitgift,  p.  43.    '  §  Ibid.  342. 


36  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.   «  wrefl  their  Sayings  to  that  Purpofe  •,  and  that  you 
^'      "  Ihould  not  fee  by  other  of  their  Books,  what 
they,  as  well  as  other  Fathers,  thought  of  this. 
And  why  you  bring  in  the  mention  of  Amhrofe^ 
I  do  not  fufficiently  apprehend.  For  neither  what 
Ambrofe  faith  of  the  firll  Pre(byter  fucceeding 
"  the  Biihop  deceafing,   nor  what  of  the  Elders 
"  that  were  wont  before  thofe  Times  to  be  admitted 
"  unto  the  Councils,  can  by  any  Pretence  look  this 
"  Way.   You  may  remember,  learned  Sir,  the  Be- 
"  ginnings  of  that  Epifcopacy,  which  you  make  ;j 
"  to  be  only  of  human  Inftitution,  are  refered  by 
"  the  Fathers,  with  one  Mouth,  to  the  Apoftles, 
as  the  Authors  thereof;  and  that  the  Bifhops 
were  appointed  as  SuccefTors  of  the  Apoftles } 
efpeciaily  in  certain  Points  of  their  Fundions. 
"  And  what  Aaron  was  to  his  Sons  and  to  the  Le- 
"  vites^  this  the  Bifhops  were  to  the  Priefts  and 
"  Deacons  \  and  fo  efteemed  of  the  Fathers  to  be  | 
''  by  divine  Inilitution*." 

Amongst  thofe  who  fignalized  themfelves  in  de- 
fending the  Caufe  of  Epifcopacy,  was  Dr.  Ban- 
croft^ who  fucceeded  Whit  gift  in  the  See  of  Can- 
terhiry.  But  I  need  no  more  than  to  mention  this 
Inftance,  fmce  it  is  fo  plain  that  even  the  Centinel 
found  himfelf  obliged  to  contradidl  the  general  Af- 
fertion  of  Mr.  J.  Owen  and  Dr.  Chauncey^  and  to 
confefs  that  Dr.  Bancroft  in  1588  preached  up  (by  a 
fmall  Miftake  he  fays,  firjt  preached  up)  in  the 
Church  of  England^  after  the  Reformation^  that  Bi- 
fjjops  were  of  divine  Right.,  an  Order  fuperior  to 
Prefiyters-\,     As  to  what  he  tells  us  immediately 

^fter 

.*  Life  of  Whit  gift,  p.  460. 

f  Centimh  Numb.  XII.  in  a  Note. 


4C 


DEFENDED.  37 

after,  that  Archbijhop  IVhitgift  faidy  he  rather  wtjh-    Sect. 
ed^  than  believed  it  to  he  true  •,  this  is  incredible  in       !• 
itfelf,  and  feems  to  reft  altogether  on  Neal's  Au- 
thority,   This  Hiftorian,  in  his  Account  of  Ban- 
croft's Sermon,  refers  to  no  other  Evidence  than 
Strypeh  Life  of  Whitgift  •,  and  in  that  Book  the 
Anecdote  is  not  to  be  met  with.     But  near  this 
very  Time,  viz.  in  1589,  the  Archbifhop  in  Anf- 
wer  to  the  Calumnies  of  Martin  Mar-Prelate^  fays, 
*'  that  he  was  perfuaded,  that  there  ought  to  be 
*'  by  the  Word  of  God,  a  Superiority,  among  the 
*'  Minifters  of  the  Church ;  and  that  it  was  fuffi- 
ciently  proved  in  his  Book  againft  Cartwright  : 
And  that  he  was  at  all  Times  ready  to  juftify  it 
by  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  by  the  Teftimony  of 
all  Antiquity*."  This  clearly  fhews,  in  Oppofi- 
tion  to  Neal  and  the  Centinel^  that  the  Archbifhop 
did  not  wijhy  but  believe  Dr.  Bancroft's  Dodrine  to 
•  be  true. 

The  Controverfy  concerning  Epifcopacy  having 
fceen    excited   and  vigoroufly   urged    againft   the 
Church,  by  Cartwright  and  his  AiTociates,  it  be- 
came the  Obje6l  of  pubhc  Attention.      On  this 
Occafion,  the  Queen's  two  great  Counfellors,  the 
Lord  Treafurer   Burleigh  and  Secretary  Walfing- 
ham^  thought  fit,  in  the  Year  laft  mentioned,  to 
have  a  Conference  on  the  Subjedl  with  Dr.  Hut  ton., 
at  that  Time   Bifliop    of   Durham,    The  Bifhop 
wrote  a  particular  Account  of  the  Conference  to 
the  Archbifhop,  in  a  Letter,   dated  October  loth, 
1589,  which  is  preferved  in  the  Appendix  to  the. 
Life  of  IVhitgift  •,  and  therein  it  appears  that  he 
very  earneftly  endeavoured  to  fromote,,  with  all  his 
Abilities,  the  Notion  of  the  Right  of  BifJoops  to  govern., 

&:c. 

*  Life  of  Whitgift,  p.  304. 


38  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  ^q.  And  as  he  was  known  to  exprefs  the  Opinion 
of  the  other  Bifhops,  Strype  obferves,  that  in  the 
Do6lrine  and  Arguments  he  advanced,  "  we  may 
*'  fee  and  underftand,  what  were  the  Judgments  of 
"  the  Bifhops  of  the  Realm,  and  the  learnedeft 
"  Divines  in  thofe  Times,  nearefl  the  Reformation 
"  of  this  Church,  and  fo  beft  knew  the  true  Con- 
"  ftitution  of  it." 

About  this  Time  Dr.  Bilfcn^  aftenvards  Bilhop 
of  Winchefler^  wrote  his  Book,  entitled,  "  The 
"  perpetual  Governir^ent  of  Chriit's  Church,"  which 
w^as  pubiiflied  in  1593.  The  firft  Edition  of  this 
Book  is  now  before  me ;  and  from  the  A  uthor's 
own  Account  of  it  in  his  Preface^  I  will  prefent  the 
Reader  with  the  following  Extrads.  "  In  the  A- 
"  poilles,  I  obferve,  fays  he,  four  things  needful 
"  for  the  firft  founding  and  eredling  of  the  Church, 
"  tho'  not  fo  for  the  prelerving  and  maintaining 
"  thereof  j  and  four  other  Points  that  muft  be  per- 
"  petuai  in  the  Church  of  Chrift.  The  four  extra- 
"  ordinary  Privileges  of  the  apoftolic  Fun6tion 
"  were,  their  Vocation  immediate  from  Chrift,  not 
"  from  Men,  nor  by  Men  ;  their  Cemmijfion  ex- 
"  tending  over  all  the  Earth,  not  limitted  to  any 
"  Place  \  their  Direction  infallible,  the  Holy  Ghoft 
"  guiding  them,  v/hether  they  wrote  or  fpake  •, 
"  and  their  Operation  wonderful,  as  well  to  con^ 
"  vert  and  confirm  Believers,  as  to  chaftife  and  re- 
"  venge  Difobeyers.  Without  thefe  Things  the 
"  Church  could  not  begin,  as  is  eafily  perceived  ; 
"  but  it  may  well  continue  without  them. — The 
"  other  four  Points  of  the  apoftolic  Delegation, 
"  which  muft  have  their  Permanence  and  Perpetu- 
*'  ity  in  the  Church  of  Chrift,  are  the  difpenfing  of 
"  the  Word  \    adminiftring  the  Sacramjcnts  -,  im- 

"  pofi  ng 


DEFENDED.  39 

*'  pofing  of  Hands  ;  and  guiding  the  Keys  to  open  Sect. 
"  or  lliiit  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  The  firft  ^• 
*'  Two,  by  Reaibn'^  they  be  ordinary  Means  and 
*'  Inftruments  by  which  the  Spirit  of  God  worketh 
"  each  Man's  Salvation,  muil  be  general  to  all 
"  Pallors  and  Prefbyters  of  Chrift's  Church-,  the 
"  other  Two,  by  which  meet  Men  are  called  to 
"  the  Miniftry  of  the  word,  &c.  there  is  no  Caufe 
"  they  fhould  be  committed  to  every  Prefbyter,  as 
"  the  Word  and  Sacraments  are.  For  as  there  can 
"  be  no  Order,  but  Confufion  in  a  Common- 
^'  Wealth  where  every  Man  ruleth,  ib  would  there 
"  be  no  Peace,  but  a  peftilent  Perturbation  of 
"  all  Things  in  the  Church  of  Chrift,  if  every 
"  Prefbyter  might  impofe  Hands,  and  ufe  the 
*'  Keys  at  his  Pleafure."  Again  :  "  Who  fucceeded 
"  the  Apoftles,  whether  all  Prefbyters  equally, 
"  or  certain  chief  and  chofen  Men,  one  in  every 
"  Church  and  City,  trufted  with  the  Government 
"  both  of  the  People  and  Prefoyters,  I  have  large- 
"  ly  debated,  and  made  it  plain,  as  well  by  the 
"  Scriptures  as  by  other  ancient  Writers  paft  all 
"  Exception,  that  from  the  Apoftles  to  the  firR: 
*'  Nicene  Council,  and  fo  all  along  to  this  our  Age, 
"  there  have  always  been  leiecled  fome  of  greater 
*'  Gifts  than  the  Refidue,  to  Hicceed  in  the  Apof- 
"  ties  Places,  to  whom  it  belonged,  both  to  mo- 
"  derate  the  Prefbyters  of  each  Church,  and  to 
take  the  fpecial  Charge  of  Impofition  of  Hands ; 
and  this  their  Singularity  in  fucceeding,  and  Su- 
periority in  ordaining,  have  been  obferved  from 
the  Apoflles  Times,  as  the  peculiar  and  fubftan- 
*'  tial  Marks  of  epifcopal  Power  and  Calling."  I 
have  been  the  larger  in  thefe  Extracts,  becaufe  of 
the  judicious  Diftindions  contained  in  them,  as 
well  as  on  Account  of  the  Scarcenefs  of  that  va- 
luable 


AC 
iC 

«c 


40  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  luable  Book,  of  which  the  Authors  of  the  Biogra- 
^'     fhical  Di5fionary  gives  this  Chara6ber,   that  "  it  is 
"  efteemed  one  of  the  befl  Books  in  Favour  of 
*'  Epifcopacy." 

In  the  next  Year,  viz.  1 594,  Hooker  began  to 
publilli  his  immortal  Work,  the  Ecclefiaftical  Po- 
lity^ wherein  the  whole  Syftem  of  Church-Govern- 
ment is  examined  from  its  firft  Principles,  and  the 
Church  of  England^  particularly  its  Hierarchy,  is 
defended  with  fuch  Force  of  Argument  and  Per- 
ipicuity  of  Method,  as  are  an  Honour  even  to 
the  Age  in  which  he  wrote.  But  this  Book  is  fo 
well  known,  that  I  need  not  be  particular.  All 
that  I  fhall  fay  is,  that  the  Author  was  fo  perfedlly 
fatisfied  of  the  Goodnefs  of  his  Caufe,  and  the 
Strength  of  his  Defence,  that  after  he  had  finifhed 
it  he  called  upon  his  Adverfaries  in  thefe  memo- 
rable Words  :  "  We  require  you  to  find  out  but 
one  Church  upon  the  Face  of  the  whole  Earth, 
that  hath  been  ordered  by  your  Difcipline,  or 
hath  not  been  ordered  by  ours,  that  is  to  fay, 
by  epifcopal  Regiment,  fince  the  Time  that  the 
*•  bleffed  ApoiUes  were  here  eonverfant." 

By  this  Time  a  Number  of  the  ableft  Pens  in  the  \ 
Kingdom  were  employed  in  defending  the  Church,  | 
againft  the  Arguments,  and  Cavils,  and  Calum- 
nies, with  which  it  was  fiercely  affaulted  by  its 
Adverfaries.  Amongft  others  that  engaged  in  its 
Defence,  was  the  learned  Dr.  Saravia^  formerly  a 
Minifter  of  the  Dutch  reformed  Church,  and  then 
a  Prebendary  of  Canterbury^  who  alio  in  the  fame 
Year  publifhed  his  Book  in  anfwer  to  Beza^  de  di- 
verjis  Minifirorum  in  Ecclefia  Gradihus  \  wherein  he 
more  particularly  pleads  the  Caufe  of  the  Englifh 

Hierarchy, 


_.     DEFENDED.  ^t 

Hi<efarchy.     He  dedicates  his  Book  to  the  Arch-  Sect! 

bifhop,  and  fays  in  his  Dedication,  "  that   in  this      ^' 
Difpute  he  had  defended  the  epifcopal  Authority 
to  be  of  divine  Inftitutiori,  and  apoftolical  Tra- 
dition,  and  that  it  tvas  taught  as  well  by  the 
Word  of  God,  as  by  the  univerfal  Confent   of 

«  all  the  Churches*." 

,  I  MIGHT  eafily  proceed  to  other  Inflances  of  the 
like  Nature  *,  but  thofe  which  I  have  produced  are 
abundantly  fufficient  for  my  Purpofe,  as  every 
fingle  one  in  this  Colle6lion  is  of  itfelf,  and  fepa- 
rately,  a  full  and  clear  Confutation  of  Dr.  Chaun- 
cy^s  pofitive  and  unlimited  Aflertion,  that  the 
Do61;rine  of  Epifcopacy^  upon  the  Footing  of  a 
divine  Appointment^  "w^ls^  first  promoted  in  the 
Church  of  England  by  Archhijhop  hand.  For  none 
of  thefe  Inftances  are  later  than  1594*,  and  it 
was  not  until  Ten  Years  afterwards,  in  1 604,  that 
hand  made  his  firft  Efforts  to  prdmote  this  Docflrine, 
in  his  Difputation  at  the  Time  of  taking  his  Degree 
of  Bachelor  of  Divinity  J, 

Before  I  take  my  Leave  of  this  Subjedb,  it 
may  be  proper  to  remark,  that  ^hat  I  have  proved 
to  have  been  the  Dodlrine  of  the  Bifhops  and  Clergy 
in  the  Reign  of  Qiieen  Elizabeth^  fniift  have  been 
agreeable  to  the  Queen,  and  to  the  principal  Per- 
fons  about  her  Court.  JVhitgift^  the  Leader  in 
this  Controverfy,  on  the  Side  of  the  Churchy  was 
made  Archbilhop  of  Canterbury — Bancroft  was  foon 
promoted  to  the  See  of  JVorcefter—-2ir\d  Bilfon^  in 
a  fhort  Timx,  was  advanced  to  tlie  Bifhoprick  of 
fVinchefter.     Thefe  Promotions  were  doubtlefs  in- 

G  tended 

*  Life  of  Whitgift,  p.  422. 
\  Cypiianus  AngUcus,  p.  ^:^. 


41  THEAfPEAL 

^^^T,  tended,  in  fome  Mealiire,  by  the  Qiieen,  to  re- 
v^afd  them  for  their  Services  in  the  Defence  of  the 
Church,  and  are  manifeft  Indications  that  She  ap- 
proved of  the  Principles  for  which  thofe  Writers 
contended, 

HAvmG  fhewn  that  the  Church  of  England  was    • 
properly  epifcopal  from  the  Beginning  of  the  Re- 
formation •,  it  is  Time  to  confider   another  general 
AfTertion,    which    is    advanced    with    a   View    of 
ftrengthening  the  former.     The  Point  of  Re-Ordi-  t 
nation^  the  Dot^tor  tells  us,  p.  13,  did  not  begin  to  be  " 
urged^  until  the  Days  of  Archbifhop  of  Laud.   I  do 
not    undetrake   to  contradi6t  him  in  this  Pointy 
but  I  will  endeavour  to  place  it  in  a  proper  Light. 

UNTIL  the  Bays  of  Archbifjjop  Laud^  there  were 
but  very  few  Cafes,  if  any,  wherein  it  was  needful 
to  conlider  the  Point  of  Re -Ordination.  It  was  not 
until  1572,  that  the  Puritans  ventured  to  withdraw 
from  the  Church,  and  to  fet  up  feparate  Aflemblies  i 
and  then,  for  many  Years,  their  Congregations 
were  fupplied  with  Miniilers  who  had  received  Or- 
dination from  the  Bifhops  in  England.  Afterwards, 
when  this  Refource  was  iniufficient  to  anfwer  their 
Occafions^  they  were  at  the  Trouble  and  Expence 
of  fending  over  for  Ordination,  fuch  Perfons  as 
were  wanted,  to  Antwerp  and  other  Places  upon 
the  Continent ;  ilill  fcrufling  to  fet  up  an  Ordina- 
tion of  their  own,  in  Oppofition  to  the  Bifhops. 
As  this  was  the  Cafe,  there  wxre  but  few  Minifters 
in  the  Kingdom^  before  the  Days  of  Archbifhop 
Land.,  that  had  fiot  received  epifcopal  Ordination  -, 
and  of  thofe  few,  I  do  not  recollect  a  fmgle  Perfon, 
that  regularly  conformed  to  the  Church,  and  ap- 
plied for  Preferment* 

The 


DEFENDED.  43 

The  foreign  Divine^  mentioned  by  the  Doa:or,  Secj. 
-viz.    P.  Martyr,   M.  Bucer,  and   P.  Fagius,  who       ^• 
were  admitted,  without  P^e-Ordination,  not  to  ec- 
clefiaftical  Preferments  in  the  efiablified  Church,  (ex- 
cepting P.  Martyr,   who  had  been  cpifcopally ^  or- 
dainedt  and  was  m^ade  at  laft  Canon  of  Chriil's- 
Church)  but  to  academical  Pr.eferm.ents  in  the  Uni- 
verfities ;  came  over  upon  the   Invitation  of  Cran- 
mer,  and  were  fettled  in  their  refpedive  Places,  be- 
fore the  Ordinal  was  compiled  and  eilabliihed.    As 
to  JVhittingham  and  Travers,    the   two   other   In- 
ftances  pointed  out  by  the  Doftor -,  the  former  was 
prefered  in  the  early  Part  of  Elizabeth's  Reign,  by 
the  Intereft  of  the  Earl  of  Leicefter,  the  great  Pa- 
tron of  the  Puritans.     Upon  the  Acceffion  of  that 
Princefs,  ihe  found  the  Affairs  of  Peligion  in  a 
confufed,  precarious  State  ;  and  the  great  Objed: 
of  her  Attention  was,  firfb,  to  bring  about  quietly^ 
if  poffible,  the  Re-Ettablifliment  of  the  proteflant 
Religion,  as  it  had  been  reformed  in  the  Reign  of 
King  Edward  -,  and  then,  to  fccure  it  againil  the 
Attempts  of  the  Papifts.  All  her  political  Addrefs 
was  requifite  for  conducting  this,  important  VVork, 
as  It  wp  forefeen  that  innumerable  Dangers  would 
attend  it.  In  this  Condition  of  Things,  it  was  found 
n^ceffary  to  encourage  and  employ  all  Pcrfons  in- 
dlfcrirninatfly,  who  were  known  to  be  Qiiaffeded 
to  Popery,  ancl  were  thought  able   by  v/riting  oi' 
preaching  to  combat  fuccefsfuUy  its  diftinguifhing 
Principles.  Wittingbam  was  a  Perfon  of  this  Cha- 
rader,  and  although  not  la^ytu^y  ordained,  yet  by 
the  Connivance  of  fome,  and  the  Intereft  of  others, 
he  obtained  the  Deanry  of  Durham.    Travers,  a^ 
noted  Puritan,    and  a  popular  Preacher,  one  ot 
thofe  who  went  over  to  Antwerp  for  Ordination^ 
findiro-  the  Mafterfliip  of  the  Temple  vacant,  made 

G  2    '  yfe 


a  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  Ufe  of  all  his  Interefl  to  obtain  it;  and  he  fiic^ 
•  •  ceeded  io  far,  that  he  engaged  even  the  Lord  Trea- 
furer  Burleigh  to  recommend  him  for  the  Appoint- 
ment. But  the  Archbifhop  oppofed  it,  alledo-ing 
his  irregular  Behaviour,  and  the  Infiifficiency  of 
his  Ordination.  The  Event  was,  that  Travers  was 
let  afide,  and  the  Place  given  to  his  Competitor, 
^^^/^^lebrated  Hooker.  His  Friends  however  madd 
a  Shift  to  keep  him  in  as  the  Preacher  of  the  Af-^ 
psrnoon  Ledure, 

Having  fhewn    in  what  Manner  TVhittingham 
and  Travers  got  their  Preferm.ents,  I  Ihall  go  on 
to  obferve,  that  there  were  in  the  former  Part  of 
this  Reign  many  Inflances  of  meer  Laymen,  without 
any  Kind  of  Ordination,  who'  had  the  Addrefs  to 
poifefs  themfelves  of  Livings  in  the  Church.  "  Ni- 
fj:hola^^^  Biihop  of  Bangor"  fays  one  who  was  moft 
_   circumftantially   acquainted  with  the   Hiftory  of 
thole  Times,  '''having  this  Year  (1567)  made  fome 
•'  Mpedlioh  into  the  Condition  of  his  Diocefs,  fent 
the;  Archbilliop,   according  to  his  Order,    the 
Names  of  all  the  Dean  and  Chapter,  and  of  all  the 
Minifters  in;  his  Diocefs,  with  Account  of  their 
Refidency  and  their  Hofpitality ;  fuch  alfo  as 
were  not  Deacons,  ^or  Priefts  j  and  yet  held  ec~ 
clefiaftical  Preferments/ ^^^To  the  End,  as   he 
wrote,  ..that  his  Grace  might  perceive,  how  Men 
that  were  no  Minifters  had  fuch  Livings,  to  the 
utter  Decay  of  learned  Men  to  be  Minifters, 
where  others  had  that  Liberty  to  hold  Benefices, 
,*'  and  not  to  be  in  Orders*."  If  then  the  Prefer- 
ments of  fuch  Men   as  Whittiyigham  and  Travers^ 
are  a  Proof,  that  in  this  Reign  the  Ordination  of 
?refbyters  was  allowed  to  be  valid  ^  thofe  Prefer-^ 

ments 
t  Life  of  Parker,  p.  256. 


<i 


DEFENDED. 


45 


ments  which  were  held  by  the  Laity  are  alfo    a  Sect. 
Troof,  that  no  Ordination  at  all  "vvas  thought  to  be      ^* 
,  iieceffary. 

But  neither  of  thefe  Conclufions  ought  to  bq 
admitted  ;  fince  we  know  upon  the  ftrongeil  Evi- 
dence, that  it  was  the  Dodrine  of  the  Church 
throughout  the  whole  of  the  Reign  v/e  are  confi- 
dering,  that  Ordination  was  of  divine  Appoint- 
ment, and  that  epifcopal  Ordination  was  of  apoilo- 
lical  Inftitution  •,  and  that  it  v/as  an  cftablifhed  Law 
from  '  the  very  Peginning  of  it,  that  "  no  Man 
'"  lliould  be  accounted  or  taken  to  be  a  lawful  Ei- 
"'  fhop,  Prieft  or  Deacon  in  the  Church  of  England^ 
"  or  fuffered  to  execute  any  of  the  faid  Functions," 
without  epifcopal  Ordination.  Yet  notv/ithftanding, 
it  was  impofTible  to  prevent  Tranfgre0ions  of  it  in 
fome  Inilances  •,  and'  fuch  Inftances  ihew,  not  what 
was  approved  of,  but  what  was  overlooked  or  per- 
mitted,^ through  the  NecefTity  of  the  Times.  Thefe 
Irregularities  however  were  corrected  by  Degrees, 
and  in  a  Courfe  of  Years  they  were  entirely  remov- 
ed. In  1586,  the  Archbifhop  took  Cognizance  of 
the  C2L{t  oi' i'r avers ^  objedling  to  "  his  Ordination 
at  Antwerp^  and  his  denying  to  receive  the  Or- 
ders of  the  Miniftry  according  to  the  Englijh 
Book  of  Ordination."  Gravers  drew  up  the  Rea- 
fons  for  his  Condud,  and  prefented  them  to  the 
Lord  Treafurer,  who  fent  them  to  the  Archbifnop. 
The  Archbifhop  returned  them  with  fhort  margi- 
nal Animadverfions,  fome  of  which  I  will  tran- 
fcribe,  for  the  Ufe  of  Dr.  Chauncy  and  his  Friend^:. 
"  As  to  that  Aflertion,  that  Minifters  lawfully 
"  made  in  any  Church  of  found  PrcfelTion  in  the 
"  Faiths  were  acknowledged  fuch  in  any  other  ^ 
"  and  this  to  be  the  univerfal  and  perpetual  Prac- 

"  tice  ; 


Sect 
I. 


46  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

tice ;  the  Archbifhop  made  this  only  Exception ; 
always  excepting  fuch  Churches  as  allowed  of  Pref- 
bytery  and  executed  it.  Then  as  to  his  Examples, 
this  was  the  Archbifhop's  Animadverfion — that 
he  knew  no  fuch  foreign  Minillers  executing  their 
Miniftry  here  \  but  if  there  were,  their  Caufe 
was  far  differing  from  his—That  Mr.  Whitting- 
ham^  had  he  lived,  had  been  deprived,  without 
fpecial  Grace  and  Pifpenfatio^  \  although  his 
Caufe  and  Mr.  1'ravers^s  were  nothing  like. — 
That  the  Laws  of  this  RealiTi  required,  that 
fuch  as  were  to  be  allowed  as  Mjnifters  in  this 
Church  of  England^  ihould  be  ordained  by  a 
Bifhop,  and  fubfcribe  ^o  the  Articles  before  him. 
Laftly,  whereas  Travers  had  faid,  that  the  laft 
Archbifhop  of  Canterbury  W4S  acquainted  with 
his  Manner  of  calling  to  the  Miniftry ;  and  fo 
was  the  Bifhop  of  Londony  and  W^re  contented 
he  fhould  preach  at  the  Temple  (as  he  had  done 
now  almoft  fix  Years)  and  that  the  prefent  Arch- 
bifhop himfelf  had  not  taken  any  Exceptions  a- 
gainft  it  -,  our  Archbifhop  faid,  that  this  was  to 
abufe  their  Patience,  and  that  he  never  allowed 
of  his  Kind  of  calling,  neither  could  h^  allo\^ 
of  it*." 

As  to  the  three  Prejhyters  that  were  confecrate^ 
Bijhcps  for  Scotland  in  the  following  Reign  •,  they 
were  not  confecrated  immicdiately,  without  previ- 
ous Ordinations,  on  the  Principle  that  Ordination 
by  Prefbyters  was  valid,  but  upon  the  Belief 
that  the  epifcopal  Charader,  as  it  included  thofe 
of  a  Prefbyter  and  a  Deacon,  might  be  conveyed 
by  a  fmgle  Confecration,  as  in  the  Inflances  of  St. 

Amhrofei 

•Life  ef  Whitgifty  p.  25  z. 


DEFENDED; 


47 


Jimhrofe  and  Ne5farius'^.  And  as  to  Bifhop  Mor-  Sect. 
ton's  Aniwer  to  the  Archbifhop  of  Spalato^  fup-  ^* 
pofing  it  to  be  fairly  reprefented  by  Peirce^  who 
produces  no  other  Authority  than  that  of  one 
Hickman ;  yet  the  Do6trine  of  the  Church  is  not 
to  be  learnt  from  the  fingular  Notions  of  an  Indi^ 
viduali 

Bv  this  Time,  I  truft,  it  tnay  fairly  be  judged, 
whether  the  Want  'of  Inftances  of  Re-Ordinatioh 
before  the  Days  of  Archbifhop  Laud^  can  in  the 
leafl  afFedl  the  Evidence  I  have  produced,  '  that 
'  the  Church  of  England  is  epifcopal.' 

I  MUST  now  return  back  to  p.  lo,  to  examine 
the  Dodlor's  other  capital  AfTertion.  //  is  in  Fa5f 
trucy  fays  he,  that  both  in  King  Henry  the  Eighth's 
T'ime^  and  in  Edward  the  Sixth's^  the  Bijhops  took 
cut  CcmmiJJtons  from  the  Crown  like  other  State- 
Officers,  for  the  ex er tiling  their  fpiritual  Jurif 
di^lion  'y  in  which  they  acknowledge^  that  all  Sorts 
of  Jur(fdi5iion^  ecclefiaftical  as  well  as  civile  flow 
originally  from  the  regal  Power^  as  frojn  a  su- 
preme Head. — Among  the  Particulars  of  ecclefi- 
aftical Power  given  them  by  this  Commiffion^  is  that  of 
ordaining  Prefhyters.  •  Now  what  the  Dodlor 
means  by  this  and  more  to  the  fame  Purpofe,  may 
be  gathered  from  p.  si-^  where  he  affirm^,-  without 
Ambiguity,  that  as  to  Authority  purely  Ecclefiaftical^ 
there  is  no  fuch  Thing  in  the  Church  of  England. 
And  he  intimates  p.  ii,  that  fuch  Authority  was 
never  claimed  by  the  Church,  until  the  aforefaid 

T>ays 

*  See  this  Matter  related  at  large  by  Colliery  in  his  Eccla. 
Mift.  Vol.  II.  p.  701,  a.s  well  as  by  Peirce.  See  alfo  Gre/s  Anf- 
Wer  to  Peirce,  p.  143. 


48  t  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect*  t)ays  of  Archbijhop  Laud,  telling  us,  again  fronx- 
^*  the  Irenicum^  that  if  we  come  lower  to  the  I'ime  of 
King  James ^  his  Majefty  himfelf  declared  ir;  Print 
as  his  Judgment^  "  that  the  civil.  Power,  in  any 
"  Nation,  hath  the  Right  of  prefcribing  what  ex- 
"  ternal  Fbr^  of  Church-Government  it  pleafes, 
*'  which  do"th  mod  agree  to  the  civil  Form  of  Go- 
*'  vernment  in  the  S.tate."  And  thus  the  Religion  of 
the  Church  of  England  is  made  to  be  altogether  a 

PARLIAMENTARY    RELIGION. 

This  Gentleman  muft  be  fuppofed  not  to  be 
ignorant  to  whom  he  is  indebted  for  the  Weaponsf 
of  his  literary  Warfare  •,  but  it  may  not  be  amifs  to 
obferve  to  others,  that  this  general  Charge  againft 
our  Reformers  was  firft  drawn  up  by  Bellarmine^ 
Saunders^  Doleman^  Harding^  and  other  Papifts,  in 
Revenge  for  their  rejecting  the  Pope's  Supremacy  ; 
and  that  the  Enemies  of  revealed  Religion  have  all 
along  endeavoured  to  fupport  them  in  the  Charge. 

The  Point  has  been  ftreniToufly  laboured  by  Tin- 
daly  the  moft  inveterate  of  the  deiftical  Tribe  v  and 
^  fome  of  our  late  Adverfaries  have  not  been  afhamed 
to  follow  him  as  their  Leader.  Even  the  good 
Do6lor  himfelf  has  honoured  his  Book  of  the 
Rights^  with  a  fecond-hand  Quotation.  Now, 
that  thefe  two  Bands,  the  Papifts  and  Deifts;  Should 
be  re-inforced  by  fome  of  the  hot-headed  extrava- 
gant Writers  on  the  Side  of  the  Diffenters,  is  not 
to  be  wondered  at ;  but  that  a  Man  of  the  Dodor's 
Coolnefs  and  Prudence  Ihould  be  feen  to'  "  go 
"  down"  to  thefe  "  Philiftines  to  Iharpen  his  Mat- 
"  tock,"  is  a  little  furprizing.  But  without  pur- 
fuing  fo  obvious  a  Refle6lion,  I  will  proceed  im-=' 
mediately  to  the  Do6trine  of  the  King's  Supremacy, 
as  maintained  in  the  Church  of  England^  and  in- 
quirer 


DEFENDED.  49 

quire  whether  it  is  fairly  reprefented  in  the  above-  Sect. 
quoted  PafTages*  ^* 

r  HAVE  already  proved  that  the  Church  of  En- 
gland  has  conftantly  aflerted  an  Authority  purely 
Eccleftaftical^    derived   from   Chrift  as  its  proper 
Source   and  Author ;  and   confequently  not  from 
the  Crown,  or  the  civil  Conftitution.     Thus,  for 
Inftance,  the  Power  of  Ordination,  and  Authority 
to  adminifter  the  Word  and  Sacraments,  have  al- 
ways been  exercifed  upon  the  Footing  of  a  divine 
Appointment,     The  Church  alfo  claims  a  farther 
"  Power  to  decree  Rites  and  Ceremonies,  and  Au- 
*'  thority  in  Controverfies  of  Faith,"  as  belonging 
to  her  by  Virtue  of  this  Appointment  ;    which 
Claim  has  been  acknowledged  and  fupported,  by 
all  our  Kings  and  Queens  fmce  the  Reformation*". 
Unlefs  therefore  the  Church  is  inconfiftent  with 
herfelf,  and  believes  an  Authority  to  be  derived 
from  Chrift,  which  She  believes  not  to  be  derived 
from  him,  but  from  another  Fountain  \  She  can- 
not hold  that  the  regal  Power  and  Supremacy  ex- 
tend to  Matters  of  this  Nature,  any  farther  than 
to  controul  and  regulate  the  external  Exercife  of 
fuch  fpiritual  Authority. 

In  what  Senfe  fhe  maintains  the  Do6lrine  of  the 
King's  Supremacy,  is  exprefied  with  great  Clear- 
nefs  and  Precifion  in  her  37th  Article.  "  The 
"  Queen's  Majefty  hath  the  chief  Power  in  this 
"  Realm  of  England^  and  other  her  Dominions, 

H  "  unto 

*  Sec  the  Authority  and  Authenticity  of  the  /r/?  Claufe 

of  Art.  XX,  clearly  proved  and  defended  in  J  Vindication  of 

the  Church  of  England^  &c.  in  Anfwer   to  Friejhraft  in  Per* 

fedion.     See   alfo  Bennetts  Hijlory  of  fhe  Articles^  and  Collier's! 

Ecclejia/iical  Hifory, 


50  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.   "  uiito  whom  the  chief  Government  of  all  Eftates 

^*      "  of  this  Realm,  whether  they  be  ecclefiaflical  or 

"  civil,  in  all  Caufes  doth  appertain,  and  is  not, 

"  nor  ought  to  be  fubjed:  to  any  foreign  Jurifdidli- 

"  on.     Whereas  we  attribute  to  the  Queen's  Ma- 

jefly  the  chief  Government,  by  which  Titles  we 

underftand  the  Minds  of  fomt  Jlanderous  Folks 

to  be  offended  ;  we  give  not  to  our  Princes  the  mi- 

niftring  of  God's  Word,  or  of  the  Sacraments, 

the  which  Thing  the  Injun6l:ions  alfo  lately  fet 

forth  by  Elizabeth  our  Queen  do  moil  plainly 

teftify  :  But  that  only  Prerogative  which  we  fee 

to  have  been  given  alv/ays  to  all  godly  Princes  in 

holy  Scripture  by  God  himfelf,  that  is,  that  they 

"  fhould  rule  all  Ellates  and  Degrees  committed  to 

"  their  Charge  by  God,  whether  they  be  Ecclefi- 

''  allical  or  Temporal,  and  reilrain  with  the  civil 

"  Sword  the  flubborn  and  evil  Doers."      More 

Power  than    this,  we  give  not  to   our    Princes  ; 

and  lefs,  I  believe,    is  not  claimed  by  the  fupreme 

civil   Governors  of    any  Kingdom    or    Republic 

upon  Earth.     In  the  Injunctions  to  which  the 

Article  refers,    the  Queen  fays  :  "  Her  Majefty 

^'  neither  doth,  nor  ever  will  challenge  any  Autho- 

"  rity,  other  than  that  was  challenged  and  lately 

*'  ufed  by  the  faid  noble  Kings  of  famous  Memo- 

^'  ry.  King  Henry  VIII,   and  King  Edward  VI, 

"  which   is  and  was  of  ancient  Time  due  to  the 

"  imperial  Crown  of  this  Realm :  That  is,  under 

*'  God  to  have  the  Sovereignty  and  Rule  over  all 

"  Manner  of  Perfons  born  within  thefe  her  Realms, 

"  Dominions  and  Countries,  of  what  Eftate,  either 

''  Ecclefiaflical  or  Temporal,  foever  they  be ;  fo 

"  as  no  other  foreign  Power  fhail  or  ought  to, have 

*'  any  Superiority  over  them." 

Such 


DEFENDED.  51 

Such  Power  as  is  attributed  to  the  Crown  in  Sect. 
the  Article^  and  explained  in  the  Injiin^ions^  is  ne-  •^• 
cefTary  to  preferve  the  Independency  of  every  State 
and  Kingdom  at  all  Times  ;  and  the  vigorous  Ex- 
ertion of  fuch  Power  was  found  to  be  peculiarly 
neceffary  to  carry  on  the  Reformation,  wherever  it 
was  attempted,  John,  Ele6lorof  Saxony^  refolving 
to  refcue  himfelf  and  his  Dominions  from  the  def- 
potic  Authority  of  the  Roman  Pontif,  and  to  efta- 
blifli  the  Doctrine  of  Luther^  alTumed  to  himfelf 
that  Supremacy  in  ecclefiaftical  Matters,  which 
the  Church  of  England  allows  to  be  the  Right  of 
all  fovereign  Princes.  In  Order  to  fecure  and  per- 
fed;  this  new  Eflablifhment,  he  ordered  a  Body  of 
ecclefiaftical  Laws  to  be  drawn  up  by  Luther  and 
Melancthon^  and  to  be  proclaimed  by  Heralds 
throughout  his  Dominions.  This  was  in  1527, 
while  our  King  Henry  VIII,  was  in  Subje6lion  to 
the  papal  Yoke,  and  not  long  after  he  had  drawn  his 
Pen  to  defend  the  Pope's  Caufe  againft  the  Doctrine 
oi  Luther.  The  next  Care  of  the  Eledlor  was  to  dif- 
place  all  fuch  of  the  Clergy  as  were  either  vicious 
or  illiterate,  and  to  fupply  the  Churches  with  fiich 
as  were  moft  eminent  for  their  Piety  and  Abilities, 
By  thefe  wife  and  fpirited  Meafures,  the  protefliant 
Religion  was  firmly  eftablifhed  in  Saxony^  and  be- 
came ^ble  to  fupport  itfelf  againft  all  the  Force 
and  Arts  of  its  Adverfaries.  The  illuftrious  Ex- 
ample of  this  Eledlor  was  foon  followed  by  other 
Princes  and  States  in  Germany.,  and  the  like  Sue- 
cefs  attended  their  Proceedings*.  The  fame  Ex- 
ample was  alfo  followed  in  England.,  as  foon  as  the 
Refolution  was  taken  to  reform  the  eftablift:ied 
Religion. 

H  2    '  If 

*  Mopem'%  Ecclefiaflical  Hillory  Vol.  II,  p.  37, 


I. 


52  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.       If  we  examine  our  37th  Article,  it  is  evident 
that  the  main  Defign  of  it  is  to  guard  againft  the 
Jurifdi6lion  of  the  Pope,    and  to  fecure  to   our 
Princes  that  Supremacy  in  ecclefiaftical  Matters, 
which  the  reformed  German  Princes  and  States  had 
fo  fuccefsfully  exerted,  and  which,  by  the  Englijh 
Conftitution,  is  one  of  the  moll  ancient  and  un- 
doubted Rights  of  the  Crown.     At  the  fame  Time 
it  is  farther  evident,  both  from  the  Article  and  the 
Queen'j  Injun^iions^  that  the  Church  was  believed 
to  have  certain  Powers  of  a  fpiritual  Nature,  which 
this  Supremacy  does  not  include,  and  which  our 
Princes    are    fo    far  from  pretending   to  convey, 
that  all  Manner  of  Right  to  exercife  them  in  their 
own  Perfons  is  therein  formally  and  exprefsly  dif- 
claimed.      If  Queen  Elizabeth  had  believed  that 
all  ecclefiaftical  Authority  flow*d  from  the  Crown, 
contrary  to  her  own  folemn  Declarations  •,  there  was 
a  Timt  wherein  She  could  have  hardly  avoided  to    ' 
betray  thefe  Sentiments  :  I  mean,  after  the  Depriva- 
tion of  the  Popijh  Biihops,  when  ihe  undertook  to 
fupply  the  vacant  Sees  with  Men  of  other  Prin- 
ciples.    It  was  with  great  Difficulty  that  She  was  ^ 
able  to  procure  proper  Perfons  to  perform  the  firft 
Confecration  %  and  had  She  been  of  Opinion  that 
She  had  the  Power  in  herfelf,  it  is  more  than  pro- 
bable,   that,  in  thofe  Circuniftances,    She  would 
have  imm.ediately  and  directly  invefted  Dr,  Parker 
with  the  archiepifcopal  Office.  But  to  fuch  a  Power 
She  had  no  Pretenfions  herfelf ;  and  She  believed, 
that  neither  Henry  VIII,  nor  Edward  VI,  pretend- 
ed to  more,  than  "  under  God  to  have  the  Sove- 
<'  reignty  and  Rule  over  all  Manner  of  Perfons/* 
whether  Ecclefiaftical  or  Temporal, 

But 


DEFENDED.  53 

Eut  E)r.  Chauncy  fays,  that  in  both  thofe  Reigns  Sect. 
the  Bijhops  took  out  Commiffions  from  the  Crown  like      ^' 
other  State-Officers.     The  moft  exceptionable  Com- 
mifTion  of  this  Nature,  in  either  Reign,  was  grant- 
ed to  Bonner^  in  1539.     The  Commiflion  at  large 
is  in  Burnet's  Colle^ion^  and  the  Subftance  of  it,  as 
tranflated  and  abridged    by  him,   is    as  follows  : 
"  That  fince  all  Jurildidion  both  ecclefiaflical  and 
*'  civil  flowed  from  the  King  as  fupreme  Head, 
''  and  he  was  the  Foundation  of  all  Power  •,  it  be- 
came thofe  who  exercifed  it  only  at  the  King's 
Courtefy,  gratefully  to  acknowledge,  that  they  had 
it  only  of  his  Bounty  •,  and  to  declare  that  they 
*'  would  deliver  it  up  again,  when  it  fhould  pleafe 
"  him  to  call  for  it*."     This,  I  believe,  muft  be 
the  Commiflion  which  tl\e  Doctor  alludes  to.     He 
is  pleafed  to  fay  that  the  Bijhops  (in  the  Plural)  took 
out  fuch   a  Commiflion,  and  affirms  that  //  is  in 
Fa5i  true  \  but  Bifhop  Burnet^  after  all  his  Exa- 
mination, fays,  "  whether  the  other  Bifhops  took 
"  out  fuch  a  CommifTion  from  this  King,  I  find 
*'  not."     The  Language  of  this  CommifTion,    as 
has  been  acknowledged,  appears  to  be  exceptiona- 
ble i  but  its  Meaning  may  notwithftanding  be  harm- 
lefs.  What  was  intended  by  it  muft  be  learnt  from 
the  public  Deekrations  of  thofe  Times  relating  to 
the  Subjed.     And  it  is  in  Fa5i  true^  that  it  was 
then  the  Dodlrine  oi  the  King,  of  the  Bifhops,  of 
the  Nation,  that  Authority  to  adminifter  the  Sa- 
craments and  to  perform  other  fpiritual  Offices,  is 
derived,    not  from  the  Crown,    but  from  Chrift. 
This  Doctrine  was  clearly  and  fully  maintained  in 
the  "  Inftitution  of  a  Chriftian  Man,"  as  has  been 
fhewn  from  Collier.  In  the  Cabala  or  Scrinia  Sacra^ 
is  publifhed  a  Letter  of  Henry  VIII,  to  the  Convo- 
cation 
?  liifl.  Ref.  Yol.  1. 1>.  267. 


I. 


cc 
cc 
cc 


54  THE   APPEAL 

Sect,   cation  of  the  Province  of  Tork^  explaining  the  Su- 
premacy;   but  in   Language  which  may  appear 
fomewhat  uncouth   at  this  Day.     Herein  fays  the 
King ;    "  If   you  take  fpiritualij?us   for  fpiritual 
*'  Men,  that  is  to  fay,   Priefts,  their  good  Ads, 
**  and  Deeds  worldly ;  in  all  this,  both  we,  and  all 
Princes,  be,  at  this  Day,  Chief  and  Head ;  af- 
ter "whofe  Ordinance,  either  in  general  or  parti- 
cular,   they  be  ordered  and  governed.     In  all 
*'  thofe  Articles  concerning  the  Perfons  of  Priefts, 
*'  their  Laws,  their  Adts  (whofe  Perfons  and  Laws 
*'  he  here  alfo,  as  in  the  Statute -Book,  calls  fpiri- 
tual) and  Order  of  living,  forafmuch  as  they  be 
indeed  all  temporal,  and  concerning  this  prefent 
Life  only ;  in  thofe  we  be  (as  we  be  called)  in- 
deed, in  this  Realm,  Caput-,  and  becaufe  there 
is  no  Man  above  us  here,  we  be  indeed  Supre- 
"  mum  Caput  :  As  to  fpiritual  Things,  meaning  by 
*'  them  the  Sacraments,  (including  Orders)  being 
''  by  God  ordained,  as  Inftruments  of  Efficacy  and 
*'  Strength,  whereby  Grace  is,  of  his  infinite  Good- 
*'  nefs  confered  upon  his  People ;    forafmuch  as 
*'  they  be  no  worldly  nor  temporal  Things,  they 
*'  have  no  worldly  nor  temporal  Head  ;  but  only 
"  Chrift  did  inftitute  them,  by  whofe  Ordinance 
*'  they  be  miniftred  here  by  mortal  Men,   eled:, 
"  chofen,  and  ordered,  as  God  hath  willed,  for 
that  Purpofe,  who  be  the  Clergy ;  who  for  the 
Time  they  do  that,  and  in  that  Refped,  tanqjiam 
Minifiri  verfantur  in  his^  qua  Hominum  Potefiati 
non  fubjciuntur  ;  in  quibus^  Ji  male  verfantur  Jim 
Scandalo^  Deum  Ultore?n  hahent  \  fi  cum  Scandalo^ 

Hominum   CogJiitionis  et.  Vindicla    efl. Such 

Things,  as  although  they  be  amongft  Men,  yet 
they  be  indeed  divtna^  quoniam  fupra  nos^funt  ni- 

.«  hit 


iC 

cc 

<c 
cc 
cc 


cc 

cc 
cc 
cc 
cc 
cc 
cc 
cc 


DEFENDED. 


SS 


"  hi!  ad^nosf,^^    It  is  therefore  evident,  that  what  Sect.' 
was  meant  to  be  given  by  the  King,  in  his  Com-       ^* 
miflion  to  the  Bilhops,  was  no  more  than  a  Liberty, 
a  legal  Authority,  to  exercife  their  fpiritual  Functi- 
ons *,  and  a  Jurifdidion,  relating  to  Matters  tefta- 
mentary,  matrimonial,  &c.  which  is  called  fpiri- 
tual, becaufe  it  is  committed  to  fpiritual  Perfons. 
And  fuch  Jurifdidlion  as  this,  undoubtedly  flows 
from  the  Crown,  and  it  becomes  thofe  who  are  in- 
trufted  with  it,  to  acknowledge  that  they  hold  it  of 
the  King's   Bounty,  and  to  deliver  it  up  when  he 
calls  for  it,  if  they  have  received  it  on  that  Condi- 
tion.    For  an  Illuftration  of  this  Matter,  let  it  be 
confidered,  that  every  Man  is,    in  fome  Senfe,  a 
King  in  his  own  Houfe  and  Family  •,  and  no  Cler- 
gyman has  a  Right  to  come  into  it  to  perform  any 
ecclefiaftical  Offices,  to  adminifter  Baptifm  for  In- 
llance,  without  his  Leave  and  Confent.  Upon  him 
it  altogether  depends,  whether  the  Clergyman  Ihall 
have  a  proper  and  lawful  Authority  to  perform  this 
Office  in  his  Family.    But  is  it  not  evident,  that 
the  giving  him  that  Authority,  is  a  very  different 
Thing  from  in  veiling  him  with  the  general  Power 
to  adminifter  the  Sacraments  ?  In  like  Manner,  as 
a  Kingdom  may  be  confidered  as  a  large  Family, 
the  King  is  the  political  Father  of  this  Family,  and 
as  fuch  is  fupreme  over  all  Perfons  belonging  to  it, 
whether  fpiritual  or  temporal.     And  without  his 
Confent  or  Authority,  no  Bifhop  or  ecclefiaftical 
Perfon  can  lawfully  officiate  within  his  Dominions, 
But  the  giving  this  Authority  by  Commiffion,  or 
in  any  other  Way,  does  not  convey  to  any  Man  his 
facred  Character,  but  always  fuppofes  him  to  have 

been 


f  The  Independent  Ponver  of  the  Church  not  Romijht  but  Pri- 
miti've  and  Catholic,  p.  137. 


56 


THE    APPEAL 


Sect,  been  previoufly  invefted  with  it,  by  Virtue  of  a- 
^'      Commiflion  from  Christ. 


The  above  Explanation  of  the  eceleliaftical 
Power  claimed  by  Henry  VIII,  as  belonging  to  the 
regal  Supremacy,  the  Words  will  fairly  admit  of  5 
and  in  this  Senfe  they  are  eafily  reconciled  with 
other  Declarations  that  were  made,  about  the  fame 
Time,  in  A6ls  of  Parliament,  aiad  in  public  Inftru- 
ments  of  different  Kinds.  Nay,  the  above  Expla- 
nation is  neceifary,  in  Order  to  make  this  very 
CommifTion  to  Bonner  confiflent  with  itfelf.  For 
befides  the  Jurifdi6tion  'conveyed  by  it,  from  the 
Crown,  it  acknowledges  another  Sort  of  Power  to 
have  been  committed  to  him  by  divine  Authority^ 
and  that  this  was  evident  from  Holy  Scripture,  The 
Words  are :  Frater  et  ultra  ea  qua  tihi  ex  facris 
Literis  divinitus  commiffa  effe  dignofcuntur.  In  the 
Reign  of  Edward  Vly  from  1548  to  1553,  Bifhops 
were  commonly  conftituted  by  the  King's  Letters 
Patent.  "  By  thefe  Letters  Patents,  it  is  clear,  fays 
Bifhop  Burnety  that  the  epifcopal  Function  was 
acknowledged  to  be  of  divine  Appointment^  and 
that  the  Perfon  was  no  other  Way  named  by  the 
King,  than  as  Lay-Patrons  prefent  to  Livings  5 
only  the  Bifhop  was  legally  authorized,  in  fuch  a 
Part  of  the  King's  Dominions,  to  execute  that 
Funftion  which  was  to  be  derived  to  him  by  Im- 
pofition  of  Hands.  Therefore  here  was  no  Pre- 
tence for  denying  that  fuch  Perfons  were  true 
Bilhops,  and  for  faying  as  fome  have  done,  that 
they  were  not  from  thrift,  but  from  the  KingJ." 


But 


X  Hift.Ref.Vol.il.  p.  2ig, 


i 


DEFENDED. 


57 


,  But  notwlthftahding.  Dr.  Chauncy  has  thought  Sect; 
fit  to  fay,  that  among  the  Particulars  of  ecclefiafiical  L  ' 
Fewer  given  them  by  this  Commiffion,  is  that  of  or- 
'daining  Prefhyters.  Now  this  AfTertion  he  borrows 
from  the  Diffenting  Gentleman,  and  the  Bijfenting 
Gentleman  borrows  it  from  Tindal,  Author  of  the 
Rights  ;  and  Tindal,  producing  no  exphcit  Form  ' 
of  Words  whereby  this  Pov/er  was  ever  conveyed 
from  the  Crown,  only  infers  it  from  the  Language 
of  the  King's  CommilTion,  which  has  been  confi- 
dered  already!  The  Words  of  Tindal  are  thefe  : 
«  The  Jurifdiaion  any  Bilhop  has,  and  his  Right 
"  to  have  a  Shdre  in  the  making  of  ecclefiaftfcal 
"  Canons,  and  the  Power  of  conftituting  inferior 
*'  Minifters,  muft  be  derived  mediately  from  the 
"  Parhament,  but  immediately  from  the  King,  as 
"  having  the  fupreme  executive  Power".  "^The 
Reader  here  kts,  that  what  Tindal,  by  way  of  In- 
ference, had  made  to  be  a  Power  of  conftiiuting 
inferior  Minifiers,  the  Dodtor  by  a  farther  Infer- 
ence from  his  Inference,  makes  to  be  a  Power  of 
ordaining  Prefhyters-,  and  thus  his  Proportion  is 
eftablifhed.  It  would  have  been  much  more  to  the 
Purpofe^  if  he,  or  the  Diffenting  Gentleman,  or  the 
Author  of  the  Rights,  had  pointed  out  to  tis  a  fmgic 
Inftance  of  a  Prefbyter  ordained  by  Virtue  of  the 
King's  CommilTion  only,  by  Perfons  who  had  no  other 
Kind  of  Authority.  For  if  the  Commiirion  was  given 
for  that  Purpofe,  it  is  ftfange  that  it  fhouid  not  have 
produced  the  intended  Effed  in  one  Inilance  j  i:\d  if 
there  were  any  Inftan  ces  of  it,  it  is  ilrange  that  the  Saga- 
city of  fuch  Writers  Ihould  not  be  able  to  difcover  them. 

I  HAVE  now  lliewn  from  our  Articles,  and  the 
public  Declarations  of  fuch  of  our  Princes  as  were 
more  immediately  concerned  in  bringing  about  the 
Reformation,  that  the  Supremacy  claimed  by   our 

I  Kings, 


58  THE     APPEAL' 

Sect.  Kings,  and  given  to  them  by  the  Church  of  Eng- 
^'  lancU  does  by  no  Means  exclude  a  purely  fpiritual 
Authority — an  Authority  which  is  derived  only 
from  Chrift— which  has  diilind  A6ts  and  Offices  of 
its  own— and  which  is  incommunicable  by  the  civil 
Magiftrate.  This  Account  might  be  confirmed  by 
Teftmionies  from  a  continued  Succeifion  ot  the 
greateil  and  bed  Writers,  which  our  Nation  has 
ever  afforded.  I  might  alfo  produce  the  Declara- 
tions of  our  fucceeding  Princes,  down  to  our  own 
Times  j  but  a  full  Treatife  upon  the  Subjed:  is  not 
my  Intention,  and  I  fear  the  Reader  has  already 
been  too  long  detained  with  it.  And  yet  I  muft 
beg  Leave  to  exhibit  the  Teflimony  of  James  Ift, 
fincethe  Dodor,  from  the  Iremcum,  has  introdu- 
ced him  as  fpeaking  the  Language,  which  feems 
to  favour  his  Side  of  the  Qiiefdon  now  in  Debate. 
This  Prince,  among  other  Thing- ,  declared,  "  that 
"  he  always  believed,  in  Oppoiition  to  the  Puri- 
''  Urns  and  Bellarmine^  who  denied  that  Bifhops 
"  received  their  Jurifdidion  immediately  from 
"  God,  that  Bifnops  ought  to  be  in  the  Church,  as 
•'  being  of  apfiolical  Inftiiution^  and  confequently 
''  of  divine  Ordination^^r 

Should  it  now  be  afked,  what  is  all  this  to  the 
Purpofe  of  an  American  Epifcopate  }  My  Anfwer 
is,  I  know  not,  but — perhaps  Dr.  Chauncy  does. 
Should  it  be  afked  again,  is  it  any  Defence  of  the 
Appeal?  To  this  I  muil:  anfwer,  lean  hardly  con- 
ceive that  it  is.  I  faid  nothing  obout  the  Opinion 
of  our  Reformers,  upon  tlie  Points  of  Epifcopacy 
and  the  King's  Supremacy ;  and  therefore  my 
Vindication  of  them,  can  properly  be  no  Vindication 

of 

f[  Stillingfleet  pro  Juramenlo  FiJelitatis,  in  Lewis's  Jpolcgy 
for  the  Clcr^'y  p.   43. 


DEFENDED.  59 

of  any  Thing;  I  had  advanced.  Ic  is  however  In-  Sect. 
tended  to  vindicate  the  Englifli  Rej-ornnation,  and  ^* 
the  Church  of  England  from  the  Charge  of  Eraftia- 
rifm  %  which  the  late  Attacks,  occafioned  by  the 
Appeal^  have  made  necellary  in  itfelf,  and  a  Duty 
peculiarly  incumbent  upon  me.  But  although  what 
has  been  faid,  is  not  properly  a  Defence  of  the 
Appeal^  yet  it  is  in  fom.e  Degree  necefiary  in  Order 
to  prepare  the  Way  for  defending  it,  againlt  fuch  4 
Kind  of  Oppofition  as  has  been  made  to  it, 

The  Way  being  thus  prepared,  \  ill  all  now  pro^ 
ceed  to  an  immediate  Defence  of  the  Appeal^  fo  far 
as  I  find  it  ought  to  be  defended  \  but  with  a  Mind 
open  to  Conviction,  and  with  a  Relolution  to  re- 
tract, if,  upon  this  Re-exam.ination  of  the  Subjecb, 
I  fliall  find,  by  the  Airiilance  of  my  Opponents,  or 
by  any  other  Means,  that  I  had  fallen  into  any 
Miilakes  of  Coniequence. 

I  BEGAN  with  obferving,  that '  it  is  an  elTential 

*  Do6frine  of  the  Church  of  England^  that  none 
'  have   Authority  in    the  Chriilian    Church,    but 

*  thofe  who  derive  it  from  Chrift,  either  mediately 
^  or  immediately.''  To  which  the  Doctor  replies  : 
This  is  not  a  'Do^rine  peculiar  to  the  Englijh  Churchy 
Every  other  Chridian  Churchy  of  whatever  Denoyni- 
nation^  holds  the  fame,  'The  Churches  in  the  Colonies^ 
are  certainly  of  this  Opinion.  So  far  then,  it  feems, 
we  agree  -,  but:  then  he  cannot  think  that  an  uninter- 
rupted Succeff^n  is  necefiary  to  a  mediate  Conveyance 
of  this  Authority  •,  fo  that  while  he  owns  the  Prin- 
ciple, he  rejedts  its  vmavoidabie  and  infeparable 
Confequence.  For  when  a  Thing  is  to  be  conveyed 
from  one  Perfon  to  another,  not  immediately,  but 
by  a  fucceflive  Communication  through  a  Number 
of  intermediate  Hands ;  if  any  one  in  the  Succef- 

I  2  fion 


6o  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  fion  fails  of  making  the  Conveyance,  the  Thing 
evidently  flops,  and  pafles  not  on  to  the  Perfon  for 
whom  it  is  intended.  Thus  for  Example  •,  fhould 
any  Thing  be  fent  from  Dover  to  London^  and  yet  - 
be  carried  no  farther  than  to  Canterbury  or  Rochefter^ 
and  perifh  there,  it  could  never  arrive  at  the  Place 
of  its  Deftination.  Again  :  Should  I  claim  a  Ti- 
tle to  any  ancient  Eftate,  and  it  fliould  appear, 
upon  Inquiry,  that  the  Chain  of  Conveyances  has 
been  broken  before  it  reached  me  ;  my  Title  will 
be  pronounced  to  be  invalid.  Nothing  but  this 
uninterrupted  Chain  of  Conveyances  is  wanting,  to 
intitle  me  to  the  bell  Eftate  in  the  Kingdom.  Once 
more  :  If  a  Man  is  to  receive  a  CommiiTion  medi- 
ately from  the  King  ;  unlefs  the  Perfon  who  confers 
it  has  been  authorized  to  do  fo,  it  is  evidently  not 
the  King's  CommifTion  that  he  receives,  but  one 
that  is  Ipurious.  Thefe  Cafes  are  plain,  and  will 
hardly  be  difputed. 

Let  us  fee  then,  whether  an  uninterrupted 
Succeflion  is  not  as  neceffary  to  a  mediate  Con- 
veyance of  Authority  from  Chrift,  as  from  the 
King  or  any  other  Perfon.  If  Authority  can  be 
conveyed  from  Chrift  mediately,  by  a  Succeftion 
that  is  interrupted,  there  muft  be  fomewhere  in  the 
Succellion  a  Perfon  who  can  give  that  which  he  has 
not.  if  the  Authority  firft  given  to  A,  is  tp  pafs  on 
fucceffively  to  B,  to  C,  to  D,  and  to  E ;  fhould 
the  Conveyance  ftop  or  be  interrupted  at  C,  fo  that 
it  paftes  not  on  to  D  ;  in  that  Cafe  D  does  not  re- 
ceive it,  and  therefore  cannot  convey  it  to  E,  un- 
lefs D  is  able  to  give  what  it  has  not.  Suppofmg  the 
Authority,  when  it  comes  down  to  C,  to  be  anni- 
hilated or  to  ceafe  \  unlefs  it  be  renewed,  E  can 
never  be  invefted  with  it.     I'he  Qiieftion  then  is, 

who 


DEFENDED.  6i 

wiio  fliall  renew  it  ?  Now  all  Authority  from  Chrift,  Sect. 
muft  flow  from  Chrift ;  if  it  begins,  and  has  its  ^* 
Source  fhort  of  him,  it  is  not  his  Authority.  If 
he  pleafes  to  rer^ew  it,  he  may  give  it  immediately 
to  E,  or  he  may  give  it  to  D,  by  him  to  be  commu- 
nicated to  E  •,  and  in  either  Way  E  may  be  invefted 
with  Chrift's  Authority.  But  now  let  us  fuppofe  that 
any  Number  of  '  Men  upon  Earth,'  or  that  '  all 
*  die  Angels  in  Heaven'  fhould  attempt  to  renew 
the  Authority  of  Chrift,  once  interrupted  and  loft  ; 
unlefs  a  Stream  can  have  a  higher  Derivation  than 
its  Source — unlefs  thefe  Men  or  thefe  Angels  can 
give  what  they  have  not,  the  Thing  is  impoflible. 
They  may  give  what  they  have — ^^they  may  give 
their  own  Authority ;  But  Chrift's  Authority  they 
cannot  give,  unlefs  they  have  received  it.  And  if 
they  have  received  it,  it  is  not  they  that  renew  the 
Authority,  but  Chrift  himfelf, 

The  Do6lor  cries  out,  is  this  the.  Do5frine  of  the, 
Church  of  Enghmd  ?  Whether  it  be  fo  or  not,  he 
in  Effedt  tells  us  that  every  other  Chrijlian  Church, 

of  whatever   Denomination^    holds    it that  the 

Churches  in  the  Colonies^  are  certainly  of  this  Opi- 
nion \  i.  e.  they  believe  a  mediate  Conveyance  of 
Authority  from  Chrift,  which  neceftarily  implies  an 
unbroken  SuccefTion  of  Conveyers.  He  appears 
therefore  to  have  a6led  inconfiftently,  in  treating 
the  general  Doctrine  of  a  mediate  Conveyance, 
or,  in  other  Words,  an  unii;iterrupted  SuccefTion, 
as  if  it  were  ftngular,  unfcriptural,  abfurd  and  con- 
temptible. He  may  fay  that  he  meant  to  explode 
fuch  a  Succeftion  in  the  Line  of  Bifhops  only  -,  but  ^ 
this  is  not  clearly  exprefied.  His  Words,  in  fome 
Places  lead  us  to  believe,  and  the  Arguments  of  fome 
of  our  Adverfaries  force  us  to  conclude,  that  the 

Dodrine 


62  THE    APPEAL 

5ect,  Do6lrine  of  an  uninterrupted  Succeflion  in  general, 
^'  without  any  Limitation,  is  confidered  by  them  as 
abfurd  and  ridiculous.  Whether  in  particular  the 
Conveyance  of  Chrift's  Authority,  from  the  Apo- 
ftles  down  to  the  prefent  Day,  has  been  made  only 
in  the  Line  of  Biihops,  is  a  different  Queftion  -,  and 
which  Way  foever  it  may  be  decided,  it  affeds  not 
the  common  Principle  of  an  uninterrupted  Suc- 
cefTion.  And  whether  it  has  been  made  in  the  Line 
of  Bifhops,  depends  upon  the  Decifion  of  another 
Queftion,  which  is,  whether  the  Power  of  Ordi- 
nation was  originally  given  to  Biihops  only,  as  an 
Order  fuperior  to  Prefbyters.  That  the  Affirmative 
of  this  Qiieftion  is  maintained  by  the  Church  of 
^ngland^  I  have  abundantly  proved. 

The  Dodor  in  p.  15,  fays  of  the  SuccefTion 
for  which  we  contend,  that  it  is  not  capable  of  any 
good  Proof  nor  is  there  any  Probability^  that  fo  long 
a  Chain^  runing  through  fo  many  Ages  of  Ignorance^ 
Violence^  and  all  Kinds  of  Impoflure^  has  never  once 
been  broke.  But  this  Affertion  militates  as  forcibly 
againft  the  Succeffion  whi^ h  the  Churches  in  the  Co- 
lonies certai'dr  bel;^rr'*=i''«*3'afniirfl"  the  F  ''  ,  t). 
As  to  the  Succeffion  in  the  Line  of  Biffiops,  I  am 
flill  of  Opinion,  that  '  it  is  incumbent  on  the  Ob- 
*  je6lors  to  prove  that  it  has  tieen  interrupted*.' 

For 

*  One  of  our  weekly  Adverfaries  fays,  that  "  in  the  De- 
**  bate  between  Dr.  Hoadly^  then  Bifliop  of  Bangor,  and  the 
**  Nonjurors,  the  Dr.  with  great  Succefs,  refuted  this  Whim, 
**  <vi^'  of  the  uninterrupted  Succeffion  of  Bifhops."  (Cent, 
Numb.  XII.)  I  am  fo  far  fro|Ti  being  of  this  Writer's  Opini- 
on, that  it  appears  to  me,  that  Bifhop  HoaiUy''^  Notions  relat- 
ing to  this  Subjeft  were  confuted,  by  fome  of  his  Antagonifts, 
even  to  a  Demonllration.  Thofe  who  attacked  the  Bilhop,  in 
what  is  called  the  Bangorian  Controverfy,  are  here  indefinite- 
ly fpoken  of  as  Nonjurors  ;  whereas  they  were,  in  general,  as 

well 


DEFENDED.  63 

For  we  know,  by  the  beft  hiftorical  Evidence,  that  Sect. 
it  has  been  the  univerfal  Pra6lice  of  the  Church, 
from  the  Time  of  the  Apoftles  to  the  prefent  Hour, 
to  acknowledge  none  for  Bifhops,  who  were   not 
ordained  by  other  Bifhops.    We  know,  from  the 
very  Nature  of  the  Office,  as  well  as  from  Hiftory, 
that  the  Confecration  of  Bijfhops  was  always  a  pub- 
lic folemn  A61,  of  which  there  were  many  Wit- 
nefles — that  every  fuch  Confecration  was  efteemed     > 
to  be   a  Matter  of  fuch  Importance,  that  the  Re- 
port of  it  was  immediately  propagated  and  carried 
even  to  diftant  Places — and  that,  in  difputed  Cafes, 
it  was  eafy  to  difcover,  whether  the  Perfon  was,  in 
Reality,  a  Bifhop  or  not  \  or,  fuppofing  the  con- 
trary, that  no  one  would  receive  epifcopal  Confe- 
cration fi'om  fuch  Hands.     We  know  alfo  from 
Scripture,  that  if  fuch  a  Succeffion  is  as  necelTary, 
as,  upon  a  fpeculative  Examination,   it  appears  to 
be,  Chrift  has  promifed  to  preferve  and  continue 
it  "  to  the  End  of  the  World."    With  thefe  vari- 
ous 

well  affeded  to  the  Government,  and  gave  as  good  Proofs  of 
it,  as  any  Men  in  the  Kingdom  ;  and  I  can  recolieft  no  more 
than  5ii«  Nonjuror  that  appeared  in  theControverfy.  What  does 
the  Centinel  think  of  Archbilhop  Potter^  of  the  Bifhops  Hare 
a.nd.  S/^er/ocAy  and  of  the  Dodlors  Snapgy  Rcgtrs  and  Siebbing, 
who  diftinguifhed  themfelves  on  theOccafion  ;  to  fay  nothing 
of  the  Body  of  the  national  Clergy  reprefented  in  Convoca- 
tion, who,  by  their  very  learned  Committee,  complained  of 
Bifliop  Hoadlyy  among  other  Things,  for  *'  the  Contempt 
"  thrown  by  him  upon  a  regular  Succeffion  of  the  Minillry, 
**  and  of  the  epifcopal  Order  in  particular  r"  Were  thefe  ail 
Nonjurors  and  Jacobites  ?  Such  Nonjurors  and  Jacobites 
are  the  American  Clergy  ;  among  whom  I  know  not  one, 
who  is  not  firmly  attached  to  his  Majelly  King  George** 
Perfon,  Family  and  Government,  or  who,  notwithilanding 
fome  fly  Hints  to  the  contrary,  looks  upon  himfelf  to  have 
any  more  Concern  with  the  Defcendants  of  James  U,  if  there 
be  any,  than  with  the  Defcendants  of  liardU  o*  Edgar 
Alhsling* 


^4  THEAPPEAL 

$ECT.  bus  Kinds  of  Evidence  we  are  abundantly  fatisfied  I 
^'      and  until  the  Objedrors  are  able  to  bring  pojitivd 
Proofs  that  the  SucceiTion  has  been  interrupted,  we 
fhall  not  recede  from  the  Claim. 

The  only  Proof  of  this  Natiire  iatterhpted  by 
the  Dodlor  is  in  a  Not^,  where  he  gives  this  In- 
formation :  Mr.  Petoy  the  Hiftorian^  fays^  that  the 
Church  of  Englandy  as  well  as  the  Scotch  Churchy 
*was  at  firfi  panted  and  governed^  without  Bifhops 
until  Bifhops  were  fent  from  Rome.  And  there  cannot 
he  any  good  Evidence  produced^  that  there  were  any 
Bifhops  in  England.^  until  Auftin  the  MoHk  was  fent 
from  Rome.  But  Dr.  Burn.,  a  much  better  Autho- 
rity^ fays,  "  The  ancient  Britons  are  believed  to 
*'  have  had  at  leaft  one  Archiepifcopal  See  before 
*'  the  Times  of  Auftin  the  Monk.,  vi^.  at  Caerleony 
*'  or  (as  fome  will  hate  it)  at  Landaff'^P  And 
Dr.  Stilling  fleet  y  to  whom  more  Attention  maybe 
paid  by  fome  People  for  the  Sake  of  his  Irenicumy 
having  carefully  ftudied  the  Antiquities  of  the  Bri- 
tifh  ChurcheSy  in  his  large  Work  on  that  Subje6i:, 
fays  in  p.  77.  "  I  fee  no  Realbn  to  queftiori  a  Stic- 
"  cefTion  of  Bifhops  here  fron^  the  firil  fouiiding 
"  of  a  Chriftian  Church. — Although,  by  the  Lofs 
"  of  Records  of  the  Britifh  Churches,  we  Cannot 
draw  down  the  SuecelTion  of  BilTiops  from  the 
Apoftles  Time,  yet  we  have  great  Reafon  to 
prefume  fuch  a  SuccefTion,  when  upon  the  firft 
fummoning  a  Council  by  ConftantinCy  three  Bri^ 
tifh  Bifhops  appeared ;  one  out  of  every  Pro- 
vince •,  as  they  did  in  other  Parts."  Again,  to 
the  fame  Purpofe  in  p.  ^'^.  "  Although  we  cannot 
"  deduce  a  lineal  SuccefTion  of  Bifhops,  as  they 
"  could  in  other  Churches,  where  Writings  were 

"  preferved, 

*  Ecclefiailical  Law,  Tit.  Bishops. 


«( 


<c 


tc 


DEFENDED.  65 

preferved,  yet  as  foon  as  through  the  Church's  Sect. 
"  Peace  they  came  to  have  Intercourfe  with  foreign      ^' 
"  Churches  (as  in  the  Council  of  Arks)  they  ap- 
*'  peared  with  a  proportionable  Number  of  Bifliops 
"  with  thofe  of  other  Provinces ;  and  their  Suc- 
celTion  was  not  in  the  leaft  difputed  among  them, 
they  fubfcribing  to  the  Sentence  and  Canons  as 
others  did."  But  after  all,  fuppofmg  the  Cafe  to 
have  been  as  is  reprefented  by  Mr.  Petcy  ;  it  affeds  ' 
not  the  Authority  of  our  prefent  Bifhops.    If  they 
derive  their  Succeflion  from  the  Billiops  that  were 
fent  over  in  the  fixth  Century,  their  not  having 
received  it  from  Billiops  of  the  old  Britijh  Churches 
is  no  better  Proof  of  its  Invalidity,  than  their  not 
having  received  it  from  the  ancient  Druids, 

Farther  Objedion  is  made  to  the  uninterrupt- 
ed Succeflion  claimed  for  our  Bifhops,  on  Account 
of  its  expojing  the  Church  and  Religion  of  Jefus  Chrift 
to  open  Ridicule  J  p.  16.  Now  I  am  unable  to  con- 
ceive that  the  general  Dodtrine  can  appear  ridicu- 
lous to  any  that  underftand  it ;  but  fhould  it  be  o- 
therwife,  I  cannot  help  it.  To  fome  Perfons,  many 
other  Do<5lrines  of  the  Chriftian  Religion  appear  to 
be  ridiculous  ;  but  will  this  be  thought  a  fufficient 
Reafon  for  Chriftians  to  explode  them  ?  Will  the 
Do6lor  be  willing  to  regulate  the  Syftem  of  his 
own  Belief,  by  this  Standard  ?  Do  the  Churches 
in  the  Colonies  eftablilh  Ridicule  for  the  Teft  of 
Tmth  ?  That  the  Church  of  England  does  not,  I 
am  very  certain.  But  flill,  that  tiie  Dodrine  of  an 
uninterrupted  Succeflion  in  the  Line  of  Bifliops 
fliould  be  more  ridiculous,  than  of  fuch  a  Succef- 
fion  in  the  Line  of  PreflDyters,  is  to  me  utterly  in- 
comprehenfible. 

K  I    COME 


66  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.       I  coME  now  to  confider  the  great  popular  Ob- 
jeiftion,  that  this   Do6lrine  unchurches  ail  the  fo- 
reign Protectants  who  are  without  epilcopal  Govern- 
ment, as  well  as  the  Preibyterians  in  Scotland^  and 
our  own  Diflenters  •,  on  which  Account  the  Do6lor 
fays  of  it,  that  bijfead  of  deferving    a  ferious  Con- 
futation^ it  may  reafonably  exdte  the  Contempt  of  all. 
I  fufpedt  he  found  it  much  eafier  to  treat  it  with 
Contempt,  than  to  give  it  a  ferious  Confutation  •, 
and  yet  as  it  ftocd  fo  much  in  his  Way,  it  might 
have  been  well  worth  his  while  to  have  removed  it, 
if  he  could,  although  at  the  Expence  of  a  ferious 
^   Confutation,  4 

Bffore  I  anfwer  dire(5tly  to  the  Objeftioh,  I  beg 
Leave  to  remind  him  of  Bifhcp  Bur.neth  Pofition, 
that  "  the  ill  Confequences  drawn  from  Opinions 
"  are  not  to  be  charged  on  all  that  hold  them, 
'*  unlefs  they  do  likewife  own  thofe  Confequences." 
Now,  if  it  be  a  Confequence  of  the  Dodlrine  of  an 
uninterrupted  Succellion  in  the  Line  of  Bifhops, 
that  many  of  the  foreign  Proteftants  are  unchurch- 
ed ;  yet  it  is  a  Confequence  that  has  feldom  been 
owned  by  the  Advocates  for  the  Do&ine.  lis  it 
then  candid  in  theDodor  to  charge  us  with  *  this 
Confequence  ?  Would  he  be  v/illing  to  be  treated 
in  this  Manner  himfelf  ?  He  is  generally  thought  to 
be  calvinillic  in  his  Principles,  and  to  hold  the 
iDo&ines  of  Election  and  Reprobation  in  the  Senfe 
of  the  Affembly's  Catechifm.  Now  he  need  not  be 
informed,  that  there  are  many  Perfons  who  believe, 
the  unavoidable  Confequences  of  thofe  Do6lrines  to 
be,  that  Man  is  no  moral  Agents  and  of  Courfe  no 
accountable  Creature — that  the  Su;^reme  Being  is  the 
Author  of  all  Sin^  &c.  Thefe  Confequences,  I  dare 
fay,  he  diibwns,  and  looks  upon  die  Imputation  of 

them 


DEFENDED.  67 

them  as  injurious.  Why  then  will  he  impute  to  us  Sect, 
a  Confequence,  which  we  neither  acknowledge  nor       ^' 
believe   to  be  included   in  our  Principle,    in  the 
Senfe  of  our  Opponents  ? 

But  to  proceed  immediately  to  the  Obje6lion  j 
If  there  is  fu<^h  a  Thing  in  the  Church  as  Autho- 
rity from  Chrifl,  not  immediately  confered,  but 
mediately  derived  down  to  the  prefent  Age  •,  the 
NecefTity  of  ^.n  uninterrupted  Succeffion  of  Con- 
veyers is  as  clear,  as  that  the  whole  is  greater  than 
its  Parts.  That  the  Power  of  Ordination  was  ori- 
ginally given  to  Bifhops  only,  as  an  Order  of  Men 
fuperior  to  that  of  Prefbyters,  is  a  Do6lrine  which 
we  believe  upon  the  Evidence  of  Scripaire.  And 
that  for  many  Ages  this  Power  was  exercifed  by  Bi- 
fhops, and  was  not  exercifed  or  claimed  by  any 
other  Perfons,  and  confequently  had  na  Exiftence= 
but  in  ^he  Line  of  Bifhops,  is  as  certain,  as  the 
Concurrence  of  <pivil  and  ecclefiaftical  Hifiory  can 
make  it.  Whatever  therefore  may  be  the  Conic- 
quences  of  the  Doctrine,  with  Reggird  to  ourfcives  or 
Others,  our  Belief  of  it  appears  to  us  to  be  founded 
\ipon  invincible  Evidence.  And  whenever  any 
Doctrine  appears  to  us  to  be  evidently  truey  we 
think  we  owght  to  beHeve  it,  whether  it  be  chari- 
table (if  Charity  may  be  predicated,  of  Doctrines) 
or  not. 

As  to  thofe  proteftant  Churches  which  are  with^ 
out  Bifhops  i  while  this  continues  to  be  their  Cafe, 
they  mull:  be  marjifellly  \\ithout  that  Authority 
which  Chrift  has  appropriated  to  Bifliops.  But  then 
fuch  is  our  Charity  towards  them,  that  we  belicive^ 
upon  the  Evidence  of  their  frequent  and  folemn 
Jpeclarations,  that  this  is  ratiier  iheir  Misfortune 

K  2  than 


68  THE     APPEAL 

Sfct.  than  their  Fault  -,  and  therefore  we  hope  (to  ufe  the 
Words  of  Bcgennan^  Prefident  of  the  Synod  of  Dort^ 
upon  the  fame  Subjedl)  that  God  will  he  merciful  to 
them.  The  Church  of  England  has  always  treated 
all  the  foreign  proteftant  Churches  with  a  kind  and 
fifterly  Affection.  She  indeed  '  holds  the  Neceflity 
'  of  Bifhops,'  but  not  that  Bifhops  are  neceflary  to 
fuch  Churches  as  are  unable  to  obtain  them.  In 
like  Manner,  She  holds  the  Neceflity  of  the  Sacra- 
ments, but  not  that  they  are  necefi^ary  to  every  In- 
dividual. She  efteems  the  Sacraments  to  be  no  more 
than  "  generally  neceiTary  to  Salvation,"  and  not 
univerfally  fo ;  or,  as  She  exprelTes  it  in  fpeaking 
of  Baptifm,  She  maintains  "  the  great  Neceflity  of 
*'  that  Sacrament  where  it  may  he  had,'*  Thus,  the 
Neceflity  of  Bifliops  is  no  more  than  a  general  Ne- 
ceflity •,  or,  in  other  Words,  Bifliops,  according 
to  the  Belief  of  the  Church  of  England^  are  necef- 
fary  only  where  they  may  he  had.  And  if  they  are 
an  Inflitution  of  Chrifl:,  intended  for  the  fl:anding 
Ufe  of  the  Church,  lefs  than  this  cannot  be  believed, 
iinlefs  in  a  fingle  Cafe  hereafter  to  be  excepted.  The 
Infcttutions  of  Chrifl:  v/e  are  bound  to  obferve,  in 
Proportion  to  our  Abilities  and  Opportunities,  and 
he  has  promifed  his  Blefling  to  us  in  the  Ufe  of 
them  •,  but  v/here  thefe  are  wanting,  pur  Defire  of 
obeying  him  will  undoubtedly  be  accepted,  inftead  of 
Obedience.  Where  Chrifl:  has  diredled  us  in  what 
Manner  to  act,  his  Direftion  is  the  Rule  of  our 
Duty  ;  but  it  is  no  Rule  ro  himfelf,  and,  whenever 
he  pleafes,  he  may  accomplifli  to  us  the  Ends,  with- 
out our  having  made  Ufe  of  the  Means  or  Inftru- 
ments. 

Whether    any  of   the  foreign  Churches,    al- 
though defirous  of  Bifliops,' are  in  Reality  ^unable 

"     to 


L 


DEFEND  ED.  69 

to  obtain  them,  is  befl  known  to  themfelves.  It  Sect. 
might  appear  otherwife  to  us,  but  they  have  affirm- 
ed it  to  be  tme  •,  and  certainly  it  is  more  charita- 
ble to  believe,  than  to  difbelieve,  them.  To  prove 
the  Sincerity'of  their  Declarations,  it  is  hoped,  that 
whenever  the  Providence  of  God  lliall  give  them 
an  Opportunity  of  obtaining  a  proteftant  Epifco- 
pate,  they  will  readily  and  thankfully  embrace  it, 
as  one  of  thofe  Churches  has  already  done,  fetting 
before  them  an  Example  worthy  of  all  Imitation. 
"  The  Proteftants  of  Bchemia^  who  were  appre- 
*'  henfive  that  Ordinations  in  which  Prefoyters,  and 
*'  not  a  Biihop,  fhould  create  another  Prefbyter, 
'^  v/ould  not  be  lawful  •,  and  were  in  Doubt  how 
^  thev  fhould  be  able  to  maintain  fach  an  Ordina- 
t;on,  either  to  others  when  they  oppofed,  or  to 
their  own  People  ,  when  they  queflioned  it ; — 
fent  Deputies  to  the  Remains  of  the  ancient 
IValdenfes^  upon  the  Confines  of  Mvravia-  and 
Aufiria^  by  whofe  Eifhops  thefe  Deputies  were 
confecrated  to  the  cpifpocal  Office,  which  they 


-<c 


have  ever  fmce  tranfmitted  to  their  Succelfors*/* 


But  if  any  of  the  foreign  Churches  have  at 
length  formed  an  Opinion  that  Biiliops  are  need- 
lefs,  and  are  in  a  Difpofition  to  refule  an  Epifco- 
pate  if  they  had  it  in  their  Power,  which  is  the  Cafe 
of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland^  and  of  the  Englifo  Diffen- 
ters  •,  although  we  cannot  but  condemn  fuch  irre- 
gular and  unfcriptural  Conduct,  yet  v/e  mean  not 
to  exclude  them  from  our  Charity,  nor  do  we  defire 
to  degrade  them  from  the  Rank  of  Chriilians.  For 
befides  the  Cafes  of  Inability  already  mentioned, 
we  believe  that  the  Goodneis  of  God  may  be  alfo 

extended 

•  Ccmmenius  iiiP'rat.  Bohem.  Killoria,  as  quoted  by  Biihop 


70  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  extended  to  Cafes  of  honefl  and  involuntary  Igno- 
rance. Where  Men,  through  the  Force  of  Prejudice 
or  of  any  imperceptible  Bias,  millake  the  Matter 
of  their  Duty,  while  they  are  earneftly  defirous  of 
knowing  and  performing  it,  we  hope  that  the  In- 
tegrity of  their  Hearts  will  be  allowed,  in  a  great 
Meafure,  to  atone  for  the  Errors  of  their  Under- 
ftandings.  If  a  Perfon,  duly  qualified  for  fome  par- 
ticular Office,  fhould  endeavour  to  obtain  the 
King's  Commiffion,  but  through  a  Miftake  fliould 
receive  a  fictitious  one  in  its  Stead  ;  although  fuch 
a  Commiffion  is  not  the  King's,  and  all  his  public 
'  A6ls  in  Confequence  of  it  are  ftridtly  illegal^  yet  a 
good  King  would  be  difpofed  to  overlook  it,  and 
to  ratify  thofe  Proceedings  which  were  invalid  in 
themfelves.  In  the  fame  Manner,  although  we  be- 
lieve that  Prefbyterian  Ordination  does  not  convey 
Chrift's  Commiffion,  which  he  was  pleafed  to  lodge 
in  other  Hands  •,  yet  as  fome  Perfons  honeftly  mif- 
take fuch  Authority  as  is  conveyed  by  it  for  his 
Commiffion,  and  by  Virtue  thereof  endeavour  to 
execute  his  Laws  and  Purpofes  relating  to  his 
Church,  we  hope  the  Irregularity  of  the  Conduct 
will  be  forgiven  them. 

Indeed  Perfons  of  the  fame  Spirit  with  tha)S; 
v/hich  governs  fome  of  our  American  Writers  a- 
gainft  the  Church,  would  probably  fay  of  it,  in. 
the  Dodlor's  Language,  that  it  is  a  vile  Affront  and. 
Abomination  to  Chrift^  as  it  undoubtedly  is  when 
wilful  and  prefumptous ;  but  I  cannot  believe  that, 
in  any  Inflance,  Chrift  will  receive  what  is  finccrely' 
intended  to  be  an  Acl  of  Obedience,  as  an  Affront 
and  an  Abomination.  It  concerns  us  to  inquire  ho-, 
ncftly,  and  with  the  greatefl  Care,  after  the  Will 
of  our  bleiTcd  Mailer,  and  if  poffible  rjot  to  mif- 

takq 


DEFENDED.  .         71 

take  it  •,  but  after  all,  if  we  fhould  unfortunately  ftill   Sect. 
miftake  it,  we  have  the  Happinefs  to  know,  that  he       ^* 
is  not  extreme  to  mark  what  has  been  done  amifs,  ef- 
pecially  through  Ignorance.  We  believe  the  Sacra- 
ments to  have  been  inftituted  by  Chrifl,  as  Means 
''  generally  nccefTary  to  Salvation  j"  but  becaufe  the 
People  called  Qiiakers,  through  a  miftaken  Judg- 
ment, are  without  the  Sacraments,  are  we  to  con- 
clude, that  all  the  worthy  and  pious  Perfons  of 
that  religious  Denomination,  fliall  fail  of  Salvation  ? 
And  yet  if  our  Opponents  believe  in  the  Manner 
that  they  argue,  they  muil  look  upon  the  molt  vir- 
tuous Quakers  upon  Earth,  as  incapable  of  Hap- 
pinefs. The  Truth  is,  whoever  believes  in  Chrifl, 
and  endeavours  to  obey  him,  however  miftaken  he 
may  have  been  in  fome  Inftances  of  his  Obedience, 
we  truft  will  be  accepted.    Whoever  makes  it  the 
Bufinefs  of  his  Life  to  fulfil  the  Conditions  of  the 
Gofpel-Covenant,  notwithftanding  any  apparent  or 
unknown  Defedls  in  the  Performance  of  his  Duty, 
may  exped:  the  BlelTings  of  that  Covenant,  through 
the  Merits  and  Mediation  of  Jefus  Chrift.  There 
are  undoubtedly  many  fuch  Perfons,  among  Chril- 
tians  o£  every  Denomination. 

But  notwithftanding.  Mens  Sincerity  in  the  Be- 
lief of  erroneous  Principles  and  in  Pra<ftices  formed 
thereupon,  can  never  be  equal  to  Sincerity  in  right 
Practices  eftablifhed  upon  juft  Principles.  A  hn- 
cere  Heathen  or  Mahometan  is  by  no  Means  to  be 
confidered  as  upon  a  Level  vvith  a  fincere  Chrifti- 
an  i  and  among  Chriftians,  we  muft  give  the  Pre- 
ference to  thole  that  come  neareft  to  what  we  believe 
to  be  the  true  Standard  of  Faith  and  Pradice,  on 
Suppofition  that  their  Sincerity  is  equal.  A  Man 
who  imagines  he  has  the  King's  CommifTion,  but 

has 


72  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  has  it  not  in  Reality,  may  endeavour  to  execute  the 
^'  King's  Pleafure,  and  otherwife  a6b  the  Part  of  a 
good  Subject,  and  as  fuch  he  may  be  treated  by 
his  Sovereign  ;  but  ftill,  an  authentic  CommilTion 
is  a  better  Thing  than  one  that  is  fpurious.  And 
it  greatly  concerns  every  Man  bearing  a  CommilTi- 
on, to  the  Authenticity  and  Legality  of  which  Ob- 
jedions  are  made,  to  examine  carefully  in  v/hat 
Manner,  and  from  what  Authority,  he  has  receiv- 
ed it. 

Thus  I  have  ventured,  perhaps  more  freely 
than  prudently,  to  exprefs  my  own  Sentiments  on 
this  delicate  Subjed,  and  the  Subllance  of  them 
may  be  reduced  to  the  following  Propofitions  :  The 
Commiffion  to  ordain,  ^c.  in  the  Chriftian  Church, 
can  be  derived  only  from  Chriil — this  CommilTion 
v/as  originally  given  exclufively  to  Bilhops — it  has 
been  brouglu  down  to  the  pre  fen  t  Age  by  a  regular 
uninterrupted  Succeffion  of  Bilhops — thofe  who  are 
\'vithout  Billiops  are  confequently  without  this  Com- 
milTion— notwithilanding,  where  the  Want  of  this 
Commifnon  has  been  fairly  owing  to  the  Impracti- 
cability of  obtaining  it,  it  will  not  be  imputed  as 
criminal—and  farther,  where  there  is  an  Opportuni- 
ty of  obtaining  it,  and  Men  negledt  it,  through  a 
m.iftaken,  but  honeft.  Belief,  that  they  are  already 
in  PofTelTion  of  it,  it  is  hoped  that  the  Goodnefe 
of  God  will  overlook  the  Defed. 

Should  I  now  be  charged  with  wanting  Chari- 
ty, I  muil  tiy  to  bear  it  as  well  as  I  can.  I  am 
confcious  that  what  I  have  faid,  has  been  offered 
with  aBifpofition  that  is  friendly  to  the  whole  human 
Race,  by  no  Means  exclufively  of  thofe,  upon  whom 
it  bears  hardcTtj  and  I  hope  it  is  not  in  con  fi  Hen  t 

with 


Defended.  73 

With^  the  Chanty  of  a  Chriftian,  which  do^s  not  Sect. 
require    us   to  believe  contrary   to   Evidence,  but       I- 
only   to    put    the    mofl    favourable    Conftruaion 
upon  Men's  Anions,  which  they  will  fairly  admit 
of.  It  would  be  v/eli  for  the  World,  if  we  all  cul- 
tivated this  divine  Temper  more  than  we  do.    We 
ihould  then  take  a  Pleaiure  in  thinking,  and  fpeak- 
mg,  and  writing  of  each  other,  as  v/ell  as  we  can  ; 
and  we  fhould  be  careful  not  to  carry  on  our  Con' 
^  troverfies,  when  they  fliould  happen  to  arife,  efpe- 
cially  thofe  wherein  Religion  is  concerned,  with  the 
Malignity  and  Ferocity  of  Barbarians.    If  we  were 
all  under  the  Influence  of  that   genuine  Charity, 
which  the  Gofpel   fo  clearly  explains,  and  injoins, 
and   infpires,  we  fliould  not  admire  a  Writer  for 
.faying  the  bitterefl;  and  feverefl:  Things  of  thofe  that 
differ  from  us,  however  materially ;  and  I  much 
quefliion,  whether  a  large,  ill-natured,  abuflve  Pam- 
.  phlet,  written  profefl"edly  v/ith  tlie  Deflgn  of  lead- 
ing Men  to  believe,  that  "  the  Church  of  England 
"  and  Church  of  Jefus  Chrifl:,  are  Confliitutions 
'I  of  a  quite  different  Nature,"  would  have  run 
through  fo  many  Re-ImpreiTions  in  this   Country, 
and  the  Author  have  been  fo  frequently  mentioned 
with  Angular  Marks  of  Refped  and  Approbation. 

But  to  proceed  :  The  Doaor  objeds,  that,  ac- 
cording to  the  Doftrine  of  an  uninterrunted  Suc- 
ceflion  in  the  Line  of  Bifliops,  if  the  ppijh  Bi/kcps, 
at  the  Reformation,  had  ftuck  to  their  own  FrincipleSy 
and  difcontimied  the  Succejfion  of  the  Miniflry  by  re- 
fufing  to  confecrate,  or  ordain  any  but  thofe  of  their 
ewn  Communion^  it  would  have  been  the  Duty  of 
Protefl:ants  to  have  contented  themielves,  without 
public  Worfliip  and  the  Ordinances  of  Relicrion.  I 
Wievc  the  popifli  Bifliops  always  fl:uck  to  their 

Li  own 


74  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,   own  Principles  fo  far,  as  not  to  confecrate  or  or- 
^'      dain  any  but  thole  of  their  own  Communion.  The 
Dodlor's  Suppofition  therefore  will  not  anfwer  the 
Purpofe  without;  another  to  fecond  it,  namely,  that 
none  of  the  popiPn  Bifliops,  ordained  at  the  Time 
of  the  Reformation,  had  turned  Proteilants   after 
their  Ordination  •,  for  if  they  had,  the  Succefiion 
might  have  been  continued  to  us  by  fuch  reformed 
Bilhops,  notwithilanding  the  Refufal  of  the  popiili 
Bnliops  to  ordain  any  but  thofe  of  their  own  Com- 
munion :  And  while  we  are  iuppofmg,  we  miay  put 
the  Cafe,  upon  other  Principles,  that  all  the  popifh 
Frejljyters  had  refufed  to  ordain  any  but  Perfons  of 
their  own  Communion  ;  and  it  will  equally  prove, 
that  it  would  have   been  the  Duty  of  Proteilants, 
not  to  have  formed  themfelves  into  religious  Af- 
fem.blies.  There  is  no  guarding  any  Caufe  or  any 
Argument,  againfl:  fuch  Suppoiitions  as  thefe.  But  | 
vvrhy  mull  we  have  been  without  a  Succellion,  if 
we  had  not  received  it  from  that  Qtiarter  ?  Might 
we  not  have  applied  to  the  Greek  Churchy  or  to  the 
Waldenfes^  and  have  received  it  from  them,  as  the 
Bohemians  afterwards  did  ? 

BUT  the  worft  of  the  Bo5lrine  of  an  uninterrup- 
ted Succejfion  is  ftill  behind  •,  for  it  is  derived  through 
the  Bifloops  of  Rome,  who  for  a  hundred  Tears  to- 
gether, were,  as  Baronius  confeffes,  "  Monilers  for 
^'  Ignorance,  Lull,  Pride  and  Luxury."  Now  I 
cannot  conceive  that  Chrifl's  Authority  is  more 
contaminated  by  a  Derivation  through  the  Bifloops 
of  Rome,  than  it  would  have  been,  had  it  been  de- 
rived through  the  Prefhyters  of  Rome,  whofe  moral 
Charaders  were  as  infamous  as  thofe  of  the  Bifhops. 
But  it  is  aftrange  Conceit,  that  the  pcrfonal  Defeds 
of  the  Minifters  of  Religion,  fhould  invalidate  their 

Admiru- 


i(. 


defended:  75 

Adminiilrations.  It  is  urterly  inccnceive?.ble  that  Sect. 
either  the  Ignorance,  or  the  Pride,  or  the  Lull,  or  ^• 
the  Luxury  of  the  popifh  Bifhops,  or  all  of  them 
together,  could  render  the  CommilTion  of  Chriil  in 
their  Hands  ineffedlual  ;  pro/idedwe  mean  by  it 
•*iny  Thing  different  from  their  moral  Integrity. 
This  Matter  is  put  in  a  proper  Light  by  Bp.  Burnet. 
'••  Though  we  have  feparated  from  many  Errors 
and  Corruptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome^  and 
in  particular  have  thrown  out  many  fuperflitious 
Rites  out  of  the  Forms  of  Ordination,  that  wc 
*^'  might  reduce  thefe  to  a  primitive  Simplicity  \  yet 
^^  as  we  acknowledge  the  Church  of  Rome  holds 
'*  fhill  the  Fundamentals  of  the  Chridian  Religion  •, 
"  fo  we  confefs  She  retains  the  Effentials  of  Ordi- 
"  nation. —Therefore  we  do  not  annul  their  Orders, 
"  but  receive  iuch  as  come  from  that  Church,  and 
J.'  look  upon  them  as  true  Priefts  by  the  Ordination 
*'  they  got  among  them,  and  fuch  were  our  firO: 
*^  Reformers,  from  whom  we  have  derived  our 
"  Ordination  f". 

I  KNEW  very  well  what  the  Dijfenting  Gentleman^ 
whom  the  Doctor  calls  one  of  the  heft  IVriters  upon 
the  Subje5f  in  Controverfy^  faid,  about  our  calling 
the  Church  of  Ro7ne  in  our  Homilies,  a  Harlot^  an 
old  withered  Harlot^  &c.  without  the  Aifiilance  of 
his  long  Extract :  and  I  know  very  well  what  Mr. 
White  faid  in  Anfwer  to  it.  Btit  to  my  great  Sur- 
prize, the  Doftor  appears  to  be  intirely  unacquaint- 
ed with  Mr.  IVhites  'Defences  of  his  Three  Letters^ 
againil  the  Attacks  of  that  Gentleman,  I  will  there-  ' 
fore  give  him,  by  Way  of  Specimen,  Part  of  his 
Reply  to  the  PafTage  under  ConfKlc^ration.  "  We 
"  indeed,    fays    Mr.    White^    for  our  Parts  are 

L  2  '-'  not 

f  Vindication  of  the  Oidinrations,  l£c*  p.  6.*.^ 


76  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  ««  not  fo  nice,  as  to  decline  calling  her  (the  Church 
•      "  of  Rome)  by  her  proper  Name  a  Harlot,  when 
"  there  is  reafonable  Occafion  for  it.    But  here,  i% 
^'^  is  only  a  fcolaing  Word,  and  brought  in  without 
any   Reafon,    as  contributing  nothing  towards 
"  putting  an  End  to  the  Controverfy  between  us 
*'  For  Harlot  as  Sht  is,  She  may  bring  forth  ChiK 
"  dren,  as  well  as  an  honed  and  virtuous  Matron, 
^' '  and  fometimes  Children  far  better  than  their  Pa- 
"  rent.  And  if  I  mufl  derive  my  fpiritual  Pedigree 
"  irom  a  Harlot,  I  had  rather  it  Ihould  be  an  old 
*^'  whither ed  one,  of  an  ancient  and  honourable  Line, 
"  than  a  young  Strumpet,  of  no  Name  and  Fami- 
"  ly,  and  who  came  into  the  World  but  Yefterday* 
In   a  Word,  I  fee  no  Reafon  v/hy  Orders  derived 
from  the  Papifts  fhould,  on  that  Account,  be  inva- 
lid,  2.nY  more  than  that  Argvjnents  derived  from  the 
Papifts  fhould  be  fo  :    And  this  very  Objedion  a- 
gainit  our  Ordinations,  appears  to  have  had  a  popifh 
Ongin.  For  a  very  reputable  Author,  who  perhaps 
v/as  as  well  acquainted  with  the  Arts  and  Schemes 
ot  the  Papifts  as  any  Man  of  his  Time,  informs 
us,  that  "  the  Jefuits,  popilh  Priefts  and  Fn^ars 
^"  condemned  our  Minifters,  becaufe  they  derived 
''  aot  their  Ordination  from  the  Church  of  Rom& 
"  Now,  lays  he,  they  turn  the  Scales,  and  affirm 
'^  them  to  be  no  lawful  Minifters,  but  antichrifti- 
*'  an  and  popilh  upon  this  falfe  Pretext,  that  they 
'•  derive   their  Ordination   and  Minijlry  from    the 
"  Pope  and  Church  of  Rome^.'' 

^  Wr  now  comb  to  the  Dodor's  Objedions  to 
tne  Arguments   in  Favour  of  Epifcopacy,  which 
■vvere  fketched  out  in  the  Jppeal-,  but  I  have  alrea- 
dy 

Second  Defence y  p.  5^. 
X  Foxes  and  Fire-jBrand$,  Pt.  2.  p,   152. 


DEFENDED.  77 

dy  been  detained  fo  long  in  fettling  Preliminaries,  Sect. 
that  I  prefume  the  Reader  will  freely  confent  to  my       *' 
pafling  over,  for  the  prefent,  this  Part  of  his  Per- 
formance. At  the  Time  of  writing  the  Appeal^  it 
was  imagined  that  giving  a  Summary  of  the  Evi- 
dence in  Support  of  the  Doftrine  of  Epifcopacy, 
and  an  Explanation  of  the  feveral  Branches  of  the 
epifcopal  Office,  would  contribute  to  place  the  Ple^ 
for  an  Afnerican  Epifcopate  in  a  fuller  and  fairer 
View,  than  could  otherwife  be  had  •,  but  I  am  now 
convinced,  that  what  was  faid  on  the  general  Subject, 
however  juft  in  itfelf,  or  proper  in  Theory,  had 
been  better  omited.     Our  Adverfarics  have  eagerly 
laid  hold  of  a  Subject,  which  has  been  already  de- 
bated for  almofl  200  Years,  and  will  probably  be 
debated  for  200  Years  to  come  ;  and  by  this  Means 
have  kept  the  principal  Objedl  of  this  Controverfy, 
which  is  an  American  Epifcopate,  at  a  Diftance, 
and  as  much  as  poflible  out  of  Sight.    The  Dodlor 
feems  to  have  aded  upon  this  Plan,  exerting  him- 
felf  upon  the  Subje6l  of  Epifcopacy,  as  if  it  was 
his  chief  Bufmefs  in  anfwering  the  Appeal  •,  where- 
as the  Curiofity  of  the  Public  called  him  to  purfue 
another  ObjeA— an  Object,  from  which  therefore 
I  propofe  to  be  no  longer  diverted,  by  an  endlefs 
Difpute  concerning  Epifcopacy.  Whether  we  are 
right  or  wrong  in  our  Notions  of  Epifcopacy,  yet 
that  we  believe  Bifliops  to  have  been  of  apoilolical 
Inftitution,  and  that  they  are  an  eflential  Part  in  the 
Conftitution  of  our  Church,  is  fufficient  to  intitle 
us  to  an  Epifcopate  -,  unlefs  Reafon  can  be  (hewn, 
which  it  is  the  grand  Bufmefs  of  our  Opponents  to 
fliew,  why  the  Church  of  England^  in  the  Color 
nies,  ihould  not  be  fuffered  to  enjoy  its  own  religi- 
ous InilitutLons,  while  every  other  Denomination 
3ft  Chriftians  is  compleatly  tolerated.    I  propofe 

therefore. 


7»  T  H  E     A'  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect*  therefore,  as  has  been  intimated,  to  pafs  over  all 
^'  th^t  has  been  faid  on  the  general  Siib|jccl  of  Epif- 
copacy,  fo  far  as  it  relates  to  the  Evidence  of  Scrip- 
ture and  the  primitive  Church.  Nor  let  the  Dodor 
complain  that  I  decline  this  Debate ;  for  I  mean 
only  to  defer  it  to  a  more  convenient  Time.  When 
we  fliall  have  fettled  the  Point  of  an  American  E- 
pifcopate,  I  will  endeavour  to  hold  myklf  in  Rea- 
dihefa  to  anfwer  his  farther  Demands. 

An  Extradl  from  ChillingwortFs  De/mmfiraticn 
vf  Epifcopacy  concluded  the  firil  Section  of  the 
Appeal.  This  the  Dodlor  does  not  attempt  to  con- 
fute; but  he  difcovers  half  a  Mind  to  get  rid  of  it 
another  Way,  by  ferving  it  as  he  before  had  ferved 
3t.  Ignatius* s  Epiftles*.  //  is^  fays  h^  p-  30^  firange 
— that  he  Jhould  write  in  the  Manner  he  is  her^ 
REPRESENTEES  to  have  done  in  Relation  to  Episcopacy, 
Does  he  then  demur  to  the  Authenticity  of  the 
Demonjirationy  and  fufpe(5l  that  ChiUingworth  was 
not  the  Author  of  it !  If  he  can  make  this  appear, 
he  will  not  be  obliged  to  encountei'  with  the  Au- 
thority of  fo  great  a  Name,  which  is  the  only  Ad- 
vantage to  be  expeded  from  it ;  but  the  Demonftra- 
tion  will  ftill  remain,  and  the  Argument  in  Favour 
of  Epifcopacy  will  be  as  cbnclufive,  whoever  may 
have  been  the  Author  of  it.  He  confronts  the 
Extradl  I  had  given  with  a  PafTage  from  the 
great  Work,  'The  Religion  of  Proteftants  a  fafe 
Way  to  Salvation  \  in  which  Pafiage  the  fame  Au- 
thor declares,  that  "  the  Bible  only  is  the  Religion 
**  of  Proteftants  •,"  but  this  is  not  inconfiftent  with 
any  Thing  advanced  in  the  Demonftration.  Where 
he  allows  us  to  appeal  to  "  the  Bible  only,"  he  is 
fpeaking  of  the  Rule  of  Faith  in  its  ftridteft  Senle ; 

and 

♦  Appendix  to  the  Dudkian  LeSlure, 


DEFENDED.  79 

and  he  ufes  no  more  than  the  common  L'»"g"^S^  «f  ^T 
Proteftants,  of  Epifcopalians,  as  well  as  others.  But 
v;  th  Regard  to  Matters  of  a  different  Nature,  we 
find  him°allowing  proper  Weight  to  the  Teft.mony 
of  Antiouity.     Thus  in  Chap.  v.  82    fpeaking  of 
the  various  Seas  of  Proteft.nts,  he  fays,  «  They 
«  did  heft  that  followed  Scripture  tnterpreted  by 
«'  ccthcUc  written  Tradition  ;  which  Rule  the  Re- 
"  formers  of  the  Church  of  England  propofed  to 
«  themfelves  to  follewjf'  I  might  produce  from  him 
many  other  ExpreffionS  to  the.  fame  Purpofe    And 
although  he  mentions  »  Popes  againft  Popes,  Coun- 
"  cils   a^^ainft  Councils,  fome  Fathers  againft  o- 
«  thers  »  (£c.  yet  he  is  not  there  fpeaking  of  the 
pure  and  primitive  Ages  of  the  Church,  but  of 
thofe  fucceeding  ones  which  had  grofsly  departed 
from  the  origjr)al  Standard. 

But  notwithftanding  the  Pretence  that  Chil- 
ling-worth  is  on  his  Side,  the  Dodor,  upon  the  whole, 
not  liking  his  Sentiments,   appeals  from  him  to 
much  greater  Men  in  the  Knowledge  of  Anttqmty,^nd. 
particularly  to  that  great  Antiquary,  the  learned  Arch-^ 
bijhop  UJher,  who,  it  feems,  in  a  Letter  to  Dr.  Be,- 
■nard   fays,  "  1  have  ever  declared  my  Opinion  to 
"  be    that  Bilhop  and  Preftyter  differ  only  inDe- 
«  gree,  not  in  Order."     The  Letter  goes  on  in. 
thefe  Words,  omited  by  Dr.  Chauncy-^^  and  con^ 
"  feauently  that  in  Places  where  Biihops  cannot  be 
«  had,  the  Ordination  by  Prefbyters  ftandeth  va- 
«  lid  •  yet  on  the  other  Side  holding  as  I  do,  that 
«  a  Bifhop  hath  Superiority  in  Degree  above  a 
«  Prefbyter,  you  may  cafily  judge  that  the  Ordi- 
«  nation  made  by  fuch  Prefbyters,  as  have  fevered 
«  themfelves  from  thofe  Biihops,  unto  v'hom  they 
«  had  fwom  canonical  Obedience,  cannot  pofTibly 


8o  THE    APPEAL 

"'  «  ?  ^f  ^^  excufedfrom  hting /M/matical ;  And 
howfoever,  I  muft  needs  think  that  the  Churche. 
which  have  no  Bifhops,  are  thereby  become  verl 
u  nl  f/"'^''^'  '"  ^^'"<-  (Government,  and  that  the 
Churches  in  Fra7tce,  wlio  living  under  a  popilh 
Power  cannot  do  what  they  would,  are  more 
excufable  in  this  Defed,  than  the  Low-Coun- 
tries that  live   under  a   free  State"— and  then 

"n    u^  ""t^'^J^"^'  ^'f^^   ^7  the  Doftor,  with 
which  the  Archbifliop  concludes  his  Letter. 

The  Reader  can  hardly  avoid  remarkinp  here 
that,  in  the  Opinion  of  that  learned  Antiqucry,  al- 
though Ordination  by  Preibyters  in  Cafes  of  Necef- 
fity  niay  be  valid,  yet  Ordination  by  Prefbyters  in 
"^"l^r^rcumftances  is  notto  bC'excufedfrom  being 

fchifmatical"-that  all  Churchea  without  Bifhop! 
are  '  very  much  defeftive  in  their  Government"--- 

and  that  the  Churches  in  France  are  in  this  Ref- 
'^'  pea  more  excufable  than  thofe  in  the  Low-Coun- 

r.  ^f'^l"  y^?-"^^  ^''-y  ^""^  ^^^'  ^b'e  to  remedy  this 
Ueteet.  As  fofull  an  Explanation  immediately  fol- 
lows the  Decoration  of  his  Opinion,  "  that  Bilhops 
and  Prefbyters  differ  only  in  Degree,"  we  may 
iafely  conclude  that  the  Primate  was  rather  fincru. 
larin  his  Mode  of  Expreffion,  than  in  his  real  Senti- 
ments, with  Regard  to  Epifcopacy.     There  is  a 
Paffage  mtheHiftory  of  the  Council  of  Constance*, 
Which  Avill,    in   fome  Meafnre,    account  for  this 
Pccuhanty  of  Expreffion.     The  Hiflorian,  ^iyino- 
an  Abflraa  of  Gerfon'^  Book  concerning  eccMaflical 
Power,  informs  us,  that  "  Gerfon  obferves  there  is 
^^  fome  Difference  between  the  Sentiments  of  the 
Lawyers  and  Divines  concerning  Epifcopacy. 
.    The  Lawyers,  fays  he,  call  Epifcopacy  an  Order, 

"  hecaufe. 
•  By  L'Enfant,  Vol.  H.  p.  27. 


DEFENDED.  8i 

'"  becaufe  'tis  above  the  Priefthood.   T'hough  the  Di-  Sect. 
"  vines   agree,    that    Epifcopacy    is  a   hierarchical 
*'  Power  above  the  Priefthood^  yet  they  do  not  fay 
*'  that  it  is  an  Order^  becaufe  it  adds  nothing  to  the 
*'  Power  of  the  Prieft  over  the  true  Body  of  Jefus 
"  Chrift,  therefore  it  is  not  a  new  Order,  but  a  new 
"*'  Power  J'  From  this  Account  it  appears  that  be- 
fore the  Reformation  althouorh  it  was  the  oreneral  O- 
pinion  that  "  Epifcopacy  is  a  hierarchical  Power 
*'  above  the  Pricllho9d,"  or  "  a  new  Power"  added 
to  that  of  Prefbyters,  which  Power  was  known  al- 
ways to  have  been  communicated  by  a  ne\^  Ordina- 
tion \  yet  in  the  Language  of  the  Divines,  in  Con- 
tradiftindion  to  that  of  the  Lawyers,    it  was  not 
called  a  diilind  Order.     Now  it  is  natural  enough 
to  fuppofe  that  zx^  Antiquary,  one  that  is  converfant; 
in  the  Writings  of  thofe  Divines  that  lived  Ages 
before  him  in  the  Times  of  Popery,  although   a 
found  Proteilant  as  the  Primate  was,  may  have 
fallen  into  fome  Part  of  their  Phrafeology,    and 
confequently  that  he  may  have  ufed  the  particular 
Words,  Order  and  Degree  in  a  Senfe  foitnewhat  dif- 
ferent from  that  wherein  they  were  ufed  by  his  Co- 
temporaries.  A  real  Difference  between  Bifhops  and 
Prefbyters  he  certainly  admitted,  and  perhaps  al- 
lowed the  Difference  to  be  as  great  as  is  contended 
for ;  and  in  that  Cafe  it  matters  not  whether  it  be 
expreffed  by  the  Word  Order,  or  Degree.    It  may 
aflift  us  in  forming  a  Judgment  of  the  Archbi- 
Ihop's  Opinion  concerning  this  Point,  to  bear  iit 
our  Minds   that  he  fully  believed  the  Epiftles  of 
St.  Ignatius  to  be  genuine  ;  for  it  is  impoffible  for 
any  Man,  with  this  Belief,  to  doubt,  whether   in 
•the  Beginning  of  the  fecond  Century,  the  Church 
was  governed  by  Bifhops,  as  diflindl  from,  and  fu- 
perior  to,  Prefbyters. 

M  Thi^ 


(C. 


82  THfi     APPEAL 

Sect.   ^    This  Reafoning,  and  the  ConclufiOxn  to  whicft 
^'      it  leads,  are  abundantly  confirmed  by  Dr.  Bernard, 
who  was  the  Archbiihop's  Chaplain  for  many  Years^ 
and  moft  intimately  acquainted  with  his  Sentiments 
relating  to  this  Subjed,  as  well  as   to  others.     In 
Order   to  prevent   any   Mifinterpretations   of  the 
ArchbiflAop's  Opinion  concerning Epifcopacy,  as  ex- 
preflcd  in  the  Letter,  Dr.  Bernard  fays  :  "  For  that 
"  Superiority  only  in  Degree  which  he  (the  Primate) 
."  faith  a  Bifhop  hath  above  a  Prefbyter,  it  is  not 
'^  *'  to  be  underflocd  as  an  arbitrary  Matter,  at  the 
''  Pleafure  of  Men,  but  that  he  held  it  to  be  of 
"  apcftolical  Injtituticn^  and  no  more  a  Diminution 
*'  of  the  Preheminency  and  Authority  of  Epifco- 
pacy,  than  the   Denomination  of  Lighn  given 
in  common  by  Mofes,  to  all  of  them  in  the  Fir- 
mament,   detrads   from    the    Sun  and  Moon, 
v/hom  he  calls   the  greater^  and  were  afTigned 
of  God  to  have  the  Rule  of  the  reft  •,  though 
"  the  Difference  between  them  be  only  gradualy 
yet  there  is  a  derivative  Subordination^  as  the 
Preheminency  of  the  Firft-born  was  but  gradu- 
al^ they  were  all  Brethren,  but  to  him  was  given 
of  God  the  Excellency,  or  Supremacy  of  Digni- 
ty and  Power^  to  him  they  muft  bow^  or  be  fub- 
^'"^  jecly   and    he  muft   have  tbe   Rule  over  them  : 
"  And  that  this  Gradus  is  both  derived  from  the 
Pattern  prefcribed  by  God  in  the  Old  Teftament, 
and  from  the  Imitation  thereof  brought  in  by 
the   Apoftles,  and  confirmed  by  Chrift  in  the 
Time  of  the  New,  the  Primate  hath  fo  fully  con- 
firmed in  that  learned  Tradate  of  his,  of  the 
Original  of  Bifhop^  which  he  hath  deduced  from 
the  apoftolical  TimeSy  that  I  know  not  what  ca% 
"be  added*  »  ^ 

As 
f  The  Judgment  of  the  late  Archbifhop,  Cifr.  p.  127. 


<c 

(C 

cc 

•  c 

(C 

cc 
cc 
cc 


DEFENDED.  83 

As  to  Bifliop  Burnet,  to  whom  we  are  refered  ;  Sect. 
whatever  he  was  inclined  to  W/>t;^  when  he  wrote 
his  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  his  fub- 
fequent  Writings  afford  innumerable  Proofs,  that 
he  afterwards  h  Sieved  the  Do^rine  of  Epifcopacy 
to  be  fupported,  both  by  the  Evidence  of  Scrip.- 
ture,  and  the  Pradice  of  the  primitive  Churchy  If 
Stillingfleet,  when  he  wrote  his  Irenicum,  and  before 
he  was  24  Years  of  Age,  ivas,  as  the  Doctor  pro- 
nounces, as  well  verfed  in  the  Fathers  as  any  Man  ; 
how  much  fuperior  to  any  Man,  in  this  Refped, 
muft  he  have  been  20  or  30  Years  afterwards,  con- 
fidering  the  almoll  uninterrupted  Application  of 
his  great  Abilities  to  Studies  of  this  Nature  ?  Now 
^t,  and  long  before,  that  Period  of  his  Age  and 
Inquiries,   this  celebrated  Writer  condemned  the 
whole  Syftem  of  his  Irenicum  •,  as  indeed  he  great- 
ly departed  from  it  within  two  or  three  Years  of 
its  firlf  Publication.     The  Dodor  may  be  inclined 
to  pay  more  Deference  to   Stillingfleet  Redtor  of 
Sutton,  than  to  Stillingfleet  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  or 
Bifhop   of  IVorcefter  -,  but  others,  I   believe,  will 
confider  fuch  Partiality  as  abfurd  and  prepofterous. 

I  HAVE  arrived,  at  length,  to  the  End  of  this 
Sedion.  And  upon  reviewing  what  has  palled 
between  us^  I  can  honeftly  declare,  that  I  am  now 
more  eftablilhed  in  my  Adherence  to  ChillingwortFs 
Conclufions  in  dire5f  Ccntradi5fion  to  thofe  of  the 
Dodlor,  than  at  the  Time  of  writing  the  Appeal ; 
more  firmly  believing  that  "  epifcopal  Govern - 
"  ment"  having  "  been  univerfally  received  in  the 
^'  Church  prefently  after  the  Apoilies  Times,"  there 
could  be  "  no  fuch  Alteration  as  is  pretended"  by 
Dr.  Chauncy  and  others  j  and  that  "  therefore  Epil- 
"  copacy"  is  not  only  "  ancient  and  catholic,"  but 
truly  "  apoftolic."  SECT. 


^+  THE    APPEAL 


Sect. 
U. 


S  E  C  T  I  O  N    II. 

T^t  ?^^'fTl'^^'  ^^""^  been  made  to 
the  fecond  Sed.on  of  the  Jppeal,  wherein 

'  fire  .r.  (T..  ^r^'"^  F^^l'^r  to  the  epifcopal  Of- 
fice are  fhewn  ;'  as  they  relate  chiefly  to  the  Evi- 
dence of  Scripture  explained  by  the  Praftice  of  the 
piimmve  Cnurch,  fo  far  Ihall  be  pafled  over,  they 
coming  not  withm  the  Intention  of  the  prefem  De- 
fence. But  a  few  Things  of  another  Nature  have 
been  mterfperfed  w,th  thefe  Objeftions,  of  which^t 
may  be  proper  to  take  Notice.       ' 

That  the  Reader  might  conceive  juftly  of  the 
true  Nature  of  the  epifcopal  Office,  I  hadK.'ht 
proper  to  make  a  D.ftindtion  between  '  the  fevm 

^L2n  '^"a  li  ^''l  '^'^"^  -  Appendages' 
theiemto  and  thofe  '  which  originally  and  eifen- 
tially  belong'  to  it.  The  Doftor'feemLo  have  no- 
thing tooppole  to  this  Diftindion  ;  butyet  ^o  ca^- 
ry  on  the  Appearance  of  differing  from  me  in  Op 
nion  he  ukes  Occafion  from  it  to  objed?  in  p  f  " 
thatit  isfo^i-j,  unreafonaMe  to  add  fuch  Appendages  to 

«,    w      ''^   "   fr./^r^r.    (Profeffors    of   what? 

Whether  the  Addition  of  fuch  Appendages  be  rea 
fonable  or  unreafonable,  is  nothing  to°me  •  and 
which  ,s  more,  it  is  nothing  to  the  Cafe  of  fuch  an 

SwnT'"  ^^  F«P°^^d  ?or  ^„W.  I  had  fad 
nothing  nor  was  it  my  Bufinefs  to  fay  any  Thine 
of  Its  being  reafonable  that  thefe  AppeldagL  Sd 

be 


DEFENDED.  g^ 

be  added ;  nor  is  it  his  Bufinefs  as  an  Anfwerer  to  Sect. 
me,  to  fay  any  Thing  of  its  being  unreafonabk,  ^- 
Much  lefs  was  it  his  Bufinefs  to  objedt  Appendages 
of  this  Kind  to  an  Epifcopate,  which  it  certainly 
is,  and  ever  was,  intended,  fhall  exifl  without 
them.  And  yet  both  the  Dodor  and  our  weekly 
Adverfaries,  have  expended  a  great  deal  of  Time 
and  Paper  in  very  impertinent  Declamation  upon 
this  Subjed. 

I  HAD  Occafion  to  obferve,  that  '  he  who  has 

*  a  fmall  Diocefs,  has  the  fame  epifcopal  Powers, 

*  as  he  that  has  a  large  one  ;  and  it  Matters  not, 
'  as  to  the  Validity  of  the  A6t,  whether  it  be  per- 

*  formed'  by  one  or  the  other.  The  Doctor  anf- 
wers,  that  it  certainly  does  as  to  his  Capacity  to  ferve 
the  great  Ends  of  his  Office — and  that  there  /V,  in 
Proportion^  the  fame  Incongruity  in  placing  Bilhops 
at  the  Head  of  large  Diocefjes^  as  in  having  an  uni^ 
"uerfal  One.  This,  confidered  likewifc  as  an  Anf- 
wer  to  me,  and  in  no  other  Light  are  we  authoriz- 
ed to  confider  it,  amounts  to  no  more  than  this ;  that 
although  what  I  faid  is  allowed  to  be  true,  yet 
Something  that  I  did  not  fay  is  certainly  falfe.  The 
Thing  which  I  did  7iot  fay  is,  that  a  Bifliop  is  as 
able  to  ferve  the  great  Ends  of  his  Office  \rx  a  large 
Diocefs,  as  in  a  fmall  one.  And  yet  if  I  had  faTd 
this,  unlefs  the  large  Diocefs  is  fuppofed  to  be  lar- 
ger than  the  largeft  in  any  proteftant  Country,  or 
in  the  primitive  Church,  to  which  only  I  had  Refe- 
rence ;  and  the  fmall  one,  fmaller  than  the  fmalleft,  it 
would  not  have  been  fo  very  exceptionable.  The 
larger  DiocefTes  in  England  have  commonly  been  as  ' 
well  taken  Care  of,  as  the  fmaller  ones ;  and  fhould 

any  of  them  hereafter,  by  an  Increafe  of  the  Inha- 
bitants, be  found  to  be  too  large  for  the  Diocefans, 

Provifion 


86  THEAPPEAL 

iECT.  Provifion  is  made  that  they  may  be  afTiiled  by  Suf- 
*^'  fragans,  in  Proportion  as  they  are  wanted.  The 
Do6tor  feems  to  judge  of  the  epifcopal  Charge, 
upon  congregational  Principles,  confounding  the 
Office  of  a  Bifhop  with  that  of  a  Parifh  Minifler ; 
which  is  like  confounding  the  Duty  of  a  Lord 
Lieutenant  of  a  County,  with  that  of  a  Mayor  of 
^  Corporation. 

I  SHALL  now  pafs  on  to  his  Exceptions  in  p.  42, 
to  what  I  had  laid  of  Aerius  and  Colluthus  \  name- 
ly, that  they  were  '  the  firft  Contrivers  of  Ordi- 
*  nation'  by  Prefbyters.  Concerning  the  former, 
the  Do6tor  endeavours  to  confole  himfelf  with  thefe 
Refledlions,  that  Epiphanius  was  the  firft  that  found 
Fault  with  Aerius^  and  that  Aerius  was  condemned 
net  only  and  meerly  for  his  Opinion  concerning  the 
Parity  of  Bifbops  and  Prefbyters.  But  as  to  Epi- 
phanius'*s  being  the  firil  Perfon  that  found  Fault 
with  Aerius^  why  might  not  he  have  been  the  firft, 
as  well  as  any  other  Perfon  ?  The  Do6tor,  I  hope, 
knows,  that  Aerius  and  Epiphanius  were  Cotempo- 
raries  •,  the  former  broached  his  Herefy  under  Va- 
lentinian^  who  was  invefted  with  the  Empire,  in 
364,  and  Epiphanius  was  made  Bifhop  of  SalamiSy 
in  '^66^  according  to  Bu  Pin.  If  an  Intimation  is  in- 
tended that  Epiphanius  was  the  only  Perfon  that,  at 
firft,  confidered  the  Dodtrine  of  Aerius  as  excep- 
tionable, or,  in  other  Words,  that  the  Parity  of 
Bifhops  and  Prefbyters  was  generally  admitted  in  the 
fourth  Century^  the  Suggeftion  is  groundlefs.  The 
united  Voice  of  Antiquity,  and  even  the  ConcefTi- 
ons  of  our  moft  confiderable  Adverfaries,  prove 
the  contrary  with  invincible  Evidence.  If  the  Mean- 
ing be,  that  Epiphanius  was  the  firft  that  wrote 
againft  Aerius  j  the  Chronology  of  th^  Fads  ought 

to 


DEFENDED.  87 

to  be  more  exadlly  afcertained,  before  any  Thing  Sect. 
material  can  be  colleded  from  this  Circiimflance.  "' 
Epiphaniiis  began  to  write  his  Book  of  HerefieSy 
according  to  Bu  Pin's  Account,  in  374,  but  when 
Aerius  firit  made  himfelf  obnoxious,  except  in  ge- 
neral that  it  was  in  the  Reign  of  the  Emperor  Va- 
fentiniany  extending  from  364  to  375,  I  do  not  find. 
Perhaps  it  may  have  been  but  a  Ihort  Time  before 
Epiphanius  wrote  againft  him : — Or,  fuppofmg  it 
otherwife,  perhaps  Aerius  himfelf,  and  the  Progrefs 
of  his  Dodrine,  were  at  firft  too  inconfiderable  to 
deferve  Notice  : — and  perhaps  there  may  be  Some- 
thing in  the  Cafe,  which,  at  this  Diflance,  we  can- 
not account  for.  If  the  Dodlor  thinks  this  laft  Sup- 
pofition  can  be  of  any  Service  to  him,  he  is  hear- 
tily welcome  to  it. 

If  Aerius  was  not  condemned  only  and  merely^  it 
is  fufficient  for  my  Purpofe  that  he  was  condemned 
chiefly y  for  his  Opinion  concerjiing  the  Parity  of  Bi^ 
fhops  and  Prejhyters.  And  that  this  was  the  prin- 
cipal Caufe  of  his  Condemnation,  appears  from 
all  the  Accounts  I  have  met  with.  The  learned 
Mofheim  gives  this  brief  Account  of  the  Matter  : 
"  About  this  Time,  Aerius^  a  Prefbyter,  Monk 
^'  and  Semi-Arian,  ereded  a  new  Sed,  and  exci- 
"  ted  Divifions  throughout  Armenia^  Pontus^  and 
*'  Cappadocia^  by  propagating  Opinions  different 
*'  from  thofe  that  were  commonly  received.  One  of 
**  his  principal  Tenets  was,  that  Bilhops  were  not 
diftinguilhed  from  Prefbyters  by  any  divine 
Right  •,  but  that,  according  to  the  Inftitution  of 
the  New-Teftament,  their  Offices  and  Authority 
"  were  abfolutely  the  fame.  How  far  Aerius  pur- 
"  fued  this  Opinion,  through  its  natural  Confe- 
"  quences,  is  not  certainly  known*."  Thj 

?  Ecclefiaftical  Hiftory,  Vol.  I.  p.  202. 


88  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

.Sect.       The  Dodlor  thinks  I  had  no  Need^  nor  any  Aed- 
^'     fon  to  join  Colluthus  with  Aerius  ;  for  he  did  not  a5i 
in  the  Capacity  of  what  Epifcopalians  would  call^  a 
meer  Frejhyter^  in  the  Bufaiefs  of  ordaining  •,  but  aS 
a  Bifhop.     But  I  thought  it  a  very  fufficient  Reafon 
for  joining  him  with  Aerius^  that  he  adted  in  that 
Capacity^  when  he  was,  in  Reality,  no  more  than 
what  Epifcopalians  would  call^    and  the  Orthodox . 
of  that  Age  did  call,  a  meer  Prefiyter.    The  true  ~ 
State  of  the   Cafe  of  Colluthus  may  be  gathered, 
from  the  fy nodical  Epiftle  of  the  Birfiops  of  Egypt ^ 
'Thehais^  Lybia  and  Pentapolis — and  from   a  joint 
Letter  of  the  Clergy  of  the  Province  of  MareotiSy 
,     both  preferved  in  the  Works  of  Athanafius,     The 
fynodical  Epiftle  of  thofe  African  Bilhops,  fpeak- 
ing  of  the  Cafe  of  one  Ifchyras^  whom  Colluthus 
ordained,  obferves  :  "  This  is  the  famous  Ifchyras^ 
who  was  neither  ordained  by  the  Church,  nor 
reckoned  among  the  Prefbyters,    ordained    by 
Meletius,  whom  Alexander^  Bifhop  of  Alexandria^ 
received.     How  then  came  Ifchyras  to  be  a  Pref- 
byter,  and  by  whom  was  he  ordained  ^  Was  it 
by  Colluthus  ?  For  that  remains  to  be  faid.    But 
Colluthus  died  a  Prefbyter,  fo  that  all   the  Im- 
pofitions  of  his  Hands  were  invalid  and  null ; 
''  and  all  thofe,  whom  he  ordained  in  his  Schifm, 
*'  are  well  known  to  have  been  reduced  to  the 
''  Laity."    The  Clergy  of  Mareotis  give  the  like 
Reprefentation  of  the  Matter.  "  Ifchyras  who  calls 
himfelf  a  Prefbyter,  is  not  a  Prefbyter,  fmce  h( 
was  ordained  by  Colluthus^  who  affumed  an  ima- 
ginary Epifcopacy,    and   was   afterwards  com-j 
manded  by  Hofius^  and  other  Bifhops  fynodicalh 
^  affembled,  to  return  to  the  Order  of  Prefbyters, 
*'  whereto  he  was  ordained.     And  confequently  all 
*'  thofe,  whom  Colluthus  ordained,  returned  to  theii 

"  formei 


cc 

cc 
cc 
cc 
cc 


(C 

cc 

cc 

cc 


DEFENDED.  89 

"  former  Stations,  and  Ifchyras  himfelf  became  a  Sect. 
"  Layman*."  I  leave  it  now  with  the  Reader  to 
judge  whether  Cclluthus  acted  in  the  Capacity  of  a 
meer  Trcjbyter^  in  the  Buftnefs  of  ordaining^  or  as 
a  Biflocf  •,  and  whether  it  was  improper  to  join  him 
with  Aeriu.s^  or  not.  If  after  all,  the  Dodlor  choofc^ 
to  give  up  the  Example  of  CoUuthus^  as  not  fa- 
vouring the  Caufe  cf  Ordination  by  Preibyters,  I 
certainly  can  have  no  Objection. 

It  was  faid  in  the  Appeal^  *"  that  there  is  not  aji 

*  Inftance  of  Ordination  by  Profbyters  to  be  found 

*  in  the  Church  for  fevcral  Ages.*  Dr.  Chauncy  in 
his  Reply,  after  remarking  that  tliefe  Words  imply 
that  there  are  numerous  Examples  of  epifcopal  Or- 
dination within  the  fame  Period,  calls  upon  me  in 
p.  44,  very  emphatically  to  produe  one  hiflancey 
within  the  long  Period  of  1 50  Tears  from  Chrijl^  of 
an  Ordination  by  any  Bif}:)op^  in  any  Part  of  the 
Chriftian  PForld  •,  meaning  by  a  Bifhop^  an  Of- 
ficer in  the  Church  of  a  fuperior  Order  to  that  of 
Prefhyters.  So  far  all  is  very  fair.  But  behold, 
Reader,  a  Curiofity.  This  very  fame  Challenge 
he  made  in  his  Dudleian  LeBure^  p.  70  ;  to  which 
a  formal  and  dired:  Anfwcr  has  been  given  by  Mr. 
Learning,  His  Words  are  as  follow  :  "  I  will  com- 
"  ply  with  his  (Dr.  Chauncfs)  Demand  •,  and  I 
"  hope  he  will  allow  the  Authority  of  my  Author. 
"  I  might  produce  many,  but  for  Brevity's  Sake, 
"  fhall  mention  but  one  Inftance  :  And  that  is  the 
"  Ordination  of  Titus  by  St.  Paul.  That  Titus  had 
"  an  epifcopal  Ordination,  appears  from  the  Charge 
"  St.  Paul  gave  him,  Tit.  i.  5.  For  this  Caufe  left 
"  /  thee  in  Crete^  that  thou  fhouldeft  fet  in  Order 
"  the  Things  that  are  wanting^  and  ordain  Elders  in, 

N  every 

•  Fo««r's  Theological  Work*,  Vol.  II.  p.  265. 


II. 


<( 


90  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  «  every  City  as  I  had   appointed  thee.  St.  Paul 
"  charged  him  alfo  to  rebuke  with  all  Authority  ;  and 
**  again,  a  Man  that  is  an  Heretic^  after  the  firji  and 
"  fecond  Admonition^  reje5i.  Here  St.  Paul  commits 
"  to  Titus  the  whole  Power  of  ordaining  Elders  in 
"  Crete^  and  of  governing  them  and  all  the  Chrif- 
"  tians  in  that  liland.     This  Authority  is  clearly 
expreiled,  and  the  Bounds,  in  which  he  was  to 
exercife  it,  diftindly  marked  out.     Thus  it  ap- 
pears, that  this  was  an  epifcopal  Ordination  in  our 
*'  Senfe  of  the  Matter.  Our  Bilhops  claim  nothing 
"  but  the  very 'lame  Power,  that  St.   Paul  save  to 
*'  Titus  over  the  Ifland  of  Crete-\''*  Is  not  this  a 
fair  and  full    Anfwer  to   the.  Dodlor's  Demand  ? 
Ought  he  then  to  be  unfatisfied,  when  all  that  he 
afks  has  been  given  him  ?  Is  it  not  very  extraordi- 
nary that  he  fhould  fo  roundly  repeat  the  Demand, 
without  the  leall  Notice  of  Mr.  Learning^ s  Anfwer  ? 
1  have  fometimes  met  with.  Perfons  who  would  al- 
ledge  the  Arguments  of  others  that  had  been  anf7 
wered,  and  the  Objections  of  others  that  had  been 
confuted,  without  taking  Notice  of  the  faid  Anf- 
wers  and' Confutations  -,  but  Dr.  Chauncy  is  the  firft: 
Man  I  have  found  in  any  of  the  Regions  of  Con- 
troverfy,    that  could,-  without  any  Symptoms  of 
Perturbation,  deal  thus  with  his  own  Arguments 
'and  Objections,  after  they  had  been  formally  anf- 
wered  and  confuted.      As  this   and  fome   other 
Things  are  againil  him,  it  is  a  Pity  he  "  undertook" 
the  "Work"  of  anfwer  ing  the  Appeal^  without 
confulting  his  Brethren  -,    and  '^  that  he  was"  not 
•"  afiiftcd  in  it,  as-— to  the  Management"  of  fomc 
particular  Parts   of  it,    "  by  Direction  from  fo 
•'  learned  and  able   a  Body  of  Men."    Had  he 
**  been  favoured  with  fuch  diftinguifhing  Advan- 

"  cages," 

t  Defence  of  the  Epifcopal  Government,  p.  61. 


D  E  F  E  N  D  E  D.    ~  91 

"  tages,"  the  few  Blemifhes  upon  the  Face  of  his  Sect. 
Compofition  might  have  been  avoided. 

The  Doclor,  in  p.  45,  pronounces  me  to  have  been 
egregkujly  miftaken^  i^f^-y^^^^f  that  from  thefourthCentu- 
ry,  until  the  Beginnwg  of  the  Reformation  in  fhefi>:teenthy 
''  rio  Inftarxes  worthy  of  Notice  occur,  to  favour 
' ,  Ordination  by  Prefbyters  :'  And  to  convince  me 
of  "my  egregious  Miftake,  he  points  out,  by  the 
AflilVance  of  Mr.  Daniel  IVilliams  and  Mi .  Thomas 
Walter^  the  Example  of  the  Waldenfes,  But  upon 
Examination  it  will  be  found,  that  thofe  two  Gen- 
tlcriien  happened  to  be  egregioujly  miflaken  them- 
felves.  We  have  already  feen,.  that  the  Bohemians 
had  Bifliops  confecrated  by  the  IValdenfes  •,  which 
fhews  that  the  IValdenfes  then  really  were,  and  by  o- 
thers  were  known  to  be,  Epifcopalians.  They  were  , 
moreover  fuch  High-Flyers^  that  they  claimed  an 
uninterrupted  SucceiTion  in  the  Line  of  Bifhops, 
as  fuperior  to  Pr^yters,  The  Bohemian  Church, 
in  their  Preface  to  the  Book  called.  Ratio  Difcipli- 
nj^y  Ordinifque  ecclefiafiici  inUnitate  Fratrum  Bohe- 
morum,  fay  T  "  And  whereas  the  faid  fValdenfes 
"  did  affirm  that  they  had  lawful  Bifhops,  and  a 

"    lawful    UNINTERRUPTED    SUCCESSION    FROM   THE 

"  Apostles  unto  this  Day-,  they  created  Three 
"  of  ourMinifters  folemnly  Bifhops,  andconfered 
"  upon  them  Power  to  ordain  Minifters.*"  One 
of  the  mofl  celebrated  modern  ecclefiaflical  Fliflo- 

rians, 

•  For  this  Account  I  am  oblige4  to  the  Author  of  the  In- 
validity  of  the  dijjhiting  Minijhyj  in  Anfv/er  to  Mr.  Q-wen  ; 
and  he  farther  informs  us,  that  by  a  ^//V/' read  in  the  Churches 
throughout  England^  for  obtaining  for  the  if'glden/es  charita- 
ble Aflillance,  not  long  before  his  writing,  wliich  was  in  17 17, 
it  clearly  appeared,  that  they  were  epifcopal  Churches,  like 
the  Church  of  England,  for  which  they  always  pray  in  tihirir 
Liturgy. 


92  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,   rians,  who  is  far  from  being  partial  to  the  Caufe  of 
^^'      Eplfcopacy,  giving  an  Account  of  the  IValdcnfes 
in  the  twelfth  Century,  lays  of  them  :  "  The  Go- 
**  vernmenc  of  the  Church  was  committed  by  the 
IFaldenfeSy    to  Bifhops,    Prefbyters   and  Deacons ; 
"  for  they  acknowledged   that  thefe  three  ecclefi- 
*'  aflical  Orders  were  inftituted  by  Chrill  himfelf  |j." 
But  of  all  Authors,  Dr.  Allix  appears  to  have  made 
the  mod  effectual  Examination  into  the  Hillory  of 
thc^TValdenfes^  and  to  have  underilood  it  the  moil: 
perfectly.     This   very  eminent  Writer  in  his  Re- 
war  ks  upon  the  ancient  Churches  of  Piedmont^  has 
abundantly  proved,  that  the  Waldenfes  always  pre- 
fervGcl,  undi:r  all  their  Perfecutions  and  Difperfions, 
the  fame  Form  of  Church-Government,  from  the 
Time  of  their  Separation  from  the  Church  of  Rome 
in  the  eleventh  Century  ;  and  that  they  diftinguifhed 
their  Clergy  into  three  Orders,  vix.  Biiliops,  Priefts 
and  Deacons.    He  proves  this  even  from  the  Tefti- 
monies  of  thofe  Enemies,  who  endeavoured  to  fix 
upon  them  the  Reproach  of  allowing  the  Laity  to 
preach  and  adminiiter  the  Sacraments.    He  proves 
it  more  fully  from  their  own  Writers,  and  even 
from  the  Example  of  that  very  Leger^  whom  Dr. 
Chauncy^  following  Mr.  Walter^  has  introduced  to 
give  Evidence  to  the  contrary.    For  heger  himfelf 
was   a  Waldenfian  Bifhop  for  twelve  Years  before 
his  Death,  exercifing  all  the  Powers  that  belong  to 
the  epifcopal  Office*     Thus  having  examined  all 
that  has  been  offered  on  the  other  Side,  I  find  my- 
felf  more  firmly  eftablifhed,  by  the  Dodtor's  Op- 
pofition,  in  my  Belief  of  the  Propofition  advanced 
m  the  A-ppal^  '  that  the  uniform  Pradice  of  the 
*  Church  for  L500  Years,  may  be  added  to  the 

*  Evidence 

11  Moftieim*s  Ecclcfia/lical  Hiflory,  VoL  I.  p.  617. 


DEFENDED.  93 


*  Evidence  of  Scripture,   in  Support  of  «hc  Ne-   S 
'  celTity  of  epifcopal  Ordination.' 

We  now  come  to  the  Subje6l  of  Confirmation,  i 
Tl\e  Dodor  pafles  over  what  I  had  faid  of  its  Na- 
ture and  Ufefulnefs  •,  the  Reafon  for  which,  is  left 
to  the  Reader's  Sagacity  to  difcover.  But  he  favours 
me,  in  p.  47,  with  fome  critical  Remarks  upon  the 
Paragraph,  wherein  I  had  made  anObfervation,that 
the  Church  of  Ejigland  declares  of  Confirmation^ 
"  that  it  hath  been  a  folemn,  ancient  and  laudable 
''  Cuftom,  continued  from  the  Apoftles  Time-,'^  and 
wherein  I  endeavoured  to  fhew  the  Meaning  of  that 
ExprefTion.  My  reafoning  upon  this  Head  he  ftyles 
eminently  curious^  and  cries  out,  demonftrahly  argued ! 
Is  Infallibility  the  peculiar  Privilege  of  the  Church  ? 
But  had  he  attended  to  the  Paragraph,  he  might 
have  feen  that  my  Defign  therein  was,  to  prove  what 
the  Church  of   England  believes    concerning  the 
Antiquity  and  Origin  of  Confirmation  •,  and  not  to 
afcertain  the  Truth  of  a  difputed  Fa5f,  by  the  Au- 
thority  of    the   Church  of   England's,    AfTertion. 
However  the  Do6tor  has  gained  this  Advantage 
by  his  Miftake  •,  he  has  fhewn  that  he  is  able  occa- 
fionlly  to  enliven  and  embellilh  his  Style  with  rhe- 
torical Decorations.     By  his  interrogating  whether 
Infallibity  is  thQ  peculiar  Privilege  of  the  Church  of 
England,   one  would  be  apt  to  imagine,    that  he 
claimed    the   Privilege  of   Infallibility  for   other 
Churcjies,    and  particularly  for  thofe  of  the  Colo- 
nies •,  but  I  hope  this  was  not  intended,  and  that 
there  is  in  Reality  nothing  more  in  it  than  a  fmall 
Slip  of  his  Pen. 

l^  p.  49,  I  am  accufed  of  unfairly  quoting  a  Text 
of  Scripture  3  a  Crime  which  I  hold  in  Abhorrence. 

Defignedly 


ECT. 

u. 


94  T  H  E     A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect.   Defignedly  to  niifreprefent  any  common  Author,  is  a 
•      Species  of  Injiiftice  which  no  honefl  Man  will  ever 
confent  to  practice  ;  but  to  treat  the  infpired  Wri- 
ters of  holy  Scripture  in  this  Manner,  is  impious 
and  abominable.     I   am  lorry  Dr.  Chamcy  could 
think  me  capable  of  committing  fuch  a  flagrant 
Ad  of  Impiety,  knowingly  and  wilfully  ;   and  yet 
from  fome  of  his  ExprelTions,  I  conclude  that  he 
thought  me,  or,  at  leaft,  that  he  intended  his  Rea- 
ders ftiould  think  me,  capable  of  doing  fo.     The 
Text  which  I  am  charged  with  mifquoting,  is  A^s 
XIX.  6,  which  he  has  heedlefsly  marked  A5is  xx.  7. 
The  whole  Verfe  is  thus :  "  And  when  Paid  had 
*'  laid  his  Hands  upon  tliem,  the  Holy  Ghofl  came 
"  on  them  ;  and  they  fpake  with  Tongues   and 
*'  propheficd."    I  am  charged  with  fupprefling  the 
latter  Part  of  the  Text,  becaufe  if  I  had  given  the 
whole  Verfe,  //  would  have  been,  at  once,\'ifibk  to 
the  Reader^  that. it  would  have  been  nothing  to  my 
Purpofe.  Would  not  any  one  from  hence  conclude, 
that  I  looked  upon  the  latter  Part  of  the  Verfe,  as 
overthrowing  the  Dodrine  which  I  was  aiming  to 
eftablifh  by  the  former  Part  of  it .?  Would  he'^not 
infer,  that  I  had  carefully  concealed  from  the  Rea- 
der thofe  Words  which  made  againft  my  Defign  ? 
Whereas,    in  Truth,   I  neither  looked  upon^'thc 
.  Words   at  firft  omited,  as  really  unfavourable  to 
my  Argument ;  nor  did  I  mean  to  conceal  them, 
for  that  or  any  other  Reafon  ;  nor  did  I,  in  Fad, 
conceal  them,  but  foon  after  produced  them  in  the 
Form  of  an  Objedion,  and  gave  them  all  th^  Con- 
fideration  I  thought  necefTary. 

To  fet  this  Matter  in  a  proper  Light,  I  muil 
obferve,  that  the  former  Part  of  the  Verfe  in  Qiief- 
tion,  in  p.  21,  of  the  Appeal^  is  introduced  as  be- 
ing 


DEFENDED. 


95 


ing  exa^Iy  parallel  with  another  Text  quoted  in  the  Sfct. 
preceding  Page.  Without  going  on  to  the  End  of  ^^'' 
the  Verle,  but  only  to  the  End  of  the  Parallel,  I 
made  a  Stop  (the  Do6tor  fays  I  Jhameftilly  flopped 
fhort)  to  point  out,  how  exactly  the  one  Defcrip- 
tion  anfwered  to  the  other,  and  to  ihew  that  they 
both  manifeftly  related  to  the  lame  Office  of  Con- 
firmation. I  then  went  on  to  anfwer  the  Objedlions 
that  might  be  fuppofed  to  arife,  againil  my  Inter- 
pretation ',  and  amongft  thefe  Objections,  I  placed 
before  the  Reader  thofe  very  Words,  which  I  am 
accufed  of  having  kept  out  of  Sight.  Whoever 
will  be  kind  enough  to  turn  to  p.  23,  of  the  appeal, 
will  find  that  I  aded  fairly  with  the  Objeclion,  and 
endeavoured  to  do  it  Juflice.  From  whence  it  is 
evident,  that  I  could  have  had  no  Delign  to  fup- 
prefs  or  conceal  the  Words  in  Difpute  ;  or  cKc  that 
I  failed  of  my  Defign,  fmce  I  adlually  did  not  fup- 
prefs  or  conceal  them.  I  might  indeed  have  quoted 
them  in  clofe  Connection  with  the  preceding  Pare 
of  the  Verfe  ;  but  I  thought  it  fufficient  to  quote 
them,  when  I  fliouldcome  to  confider  them.  WheVi 
I  confidered  them,  I  fuppofed  no  Perfon  would  ob- 
je6t  them,  who  did  not  know  their  Connexion  as 
ufed  by  the  facred  Hiftorian  •,  the  Knowledge  of 
which  I  had  no  Defire  to  conceal  from  any  one. 
%y  this  Time  I  hope  tiije  Reader  is  fatisfied,  that  1 
am  free  from  the  Guilt  imputed  to  me ;  and  that  the 
Dodor  has,  I  will  not  {a,YjbamefuIlyy  but  however  hdt 
'much  to  his  Honor,  mifreprefented  the  whole  Matter. 

He  concludes  what  he  has  to  fay  oh  the  $ubje(!t 
of  Confirmation,  with  a  long  Extradb  from  the 
Dijfenting  Gentleman's  Anfwer  to  Mr.  White  \  the 
Defign  of  which  is  to  fhew,  that  the  Bilhop  has  nOt 
Warrant  to  fronotince^  in  the  Adminiftration  of  that 

O/fiec, 
\ 


9^  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.   Office,  a  Man's  Sins  all  forgiven,  and  himfelf  re- 
•     generated  by  the  Holy    Ghoft.     In  Anlwer  to   this 
Harangue,  it  will  be  fufficicnt  to  give  the  Words 
of  Mr.  IVhite.    "  I  have  now,  fays  he,  only  to  clear 
^1  up  one  or  two  FafTages   in  the  Office   for  Con- 
^'^'  firmatron,  and  to  relcue  them  from  the  perverfe 
"  Interpretation  of  this  Writer,     The'lirft  is  th-t 
^'^'  w'lierein  the  Bilhop  declares,    concerning  thofe 
!c  T^f /°"^^  ^^  Confirmation,  that  God  has  voucb^ 
^   fafed  to  regenerate  thofe  his  Servants  by  Water  and 
*'  the  Holy  Ghoft,  and  given  them  the  Forgivenefs  of 
*^'  all  their  Sins,^    This  he  is  pleafed  to  underftand 
^^  as  a  Declaration   concerning  their  prefcnt  State, 
"  and  an  AfTurance  that  they  are,  all,  though  fome 
^^  of  them  may  be  abfolute  Strangers  to  the  renewing 
^1  hifluences  of  God's  Spirit^  and  faft  bound  in  their 
"  Sins,  in  a  State  of  Grace  and  Acceptance,  and 
^^  need  not  doubt  of  their  Salvation.     Whereas, 
"  It  IS  very  plain,  from  the  mention  of  Water, 
and  their  being  regenerated   thereby,  that  it  is 
only  declarative  of  the  State  they  were  put  into 
by  Baptifm,    they  having  received   therein,  or 
^^  being  thereby  intitled  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the 
^^  Forgivenefs  of  all  Sin. — But  though  the  State 
^^  which   they   were  put  into  when  they  received 
^^  their  Baptifm,  was,  doubtlefs,  the  State  which 
^^  IS  here  meant,  yet,  for  Argument's  Sake,  I  will 
^^  admit  what  this  Gentleman  begs  me   to   admit 
^^  (for  he  offers  no  Proof  of  it)  that  the  Bilhop 
^^  means  the  State  they  are  fuppofed,  at  prefent, 
^^  to  be  in.     And  now  we  will  fee,  if  this  Decla- 
ration from  the  Bifhop,  even  in  this  View,  be 
'^  really  fuch  an  unwarrantable  and  prefumptuous 
*  one  as  our    Author  reprefents  it  to  be,  and  is 
not  fairly  defenfiblc. 


*'  Let 


THEAPPEAL  91 

'-''■  Let  it  then  be  obferved,  that  this  Declara-  Sect. 
''  tlon  is  made,  not  feparately  to  each  Individual,  ^^* 
''  but  to  the  whole  AiTembly-,  the  whole  Multitude 
*'  of  thofe  who  prefent  tliemfelves  for,Confirma- 
"  tion.  And  as  the  far  greater  Pai-t  of  thefe  are 
*'  very  young  Pcrfons,  whom  the  Biihop  may  rea- 
"  fonably,  or  in  the  Judgment  of  Charity,  believe 
*'  not  to  be  yet  defiled,  with  the  Polkuions  that  are  in 
**  the  World  through  Luft^  and  moft  of  the  Reft, 
"  who  are  of  advanced  Years,  Men  feemingly 
"  ferious,  and  having  a  Difpofiiion  to  real  Flolincls, 
"  and  he  does  not  know  for  certain,  therc  are  any  ^ 
*'  amorigft  them,  but  can  only  prefum.e,  that,  in 
fo  great  a  Number,  there  may  probably  be  fom.e 
of  another  Charader,  I  do  not  fee  but  the  Biiliop 
is  fufficiently  warranted  to  make  fuch  a  Declara- 
*'  tion  concerhing;  them,  as  he  does  here.  Nor 
"  can  I  apprehend  there  is  the  leail  Danger  that  a 
*'  few  Individuals,  who  are  yet  unholy,  and  in 
"  their  Sins,  getting  in  amongft  them,  will  take 
"  Encouragement,  and  conceive  falfe  Hopes  of  the 
Safety  of  their  Condition,  from  any  fuch  Decla- 
ration •,  which  they  cannot  but  be  fenfible  Vv^as 
never  meant  to  be  applied  to  themfelves,  or  fuch 
"  Kind  of  Perfons,  as  they  muft  needs  know  them- 
"  felves  to  be." 

Mr.  White  then  goes  on  to  Ihew,  in  the  Words 
of  Dr.  Doddridge^  that  the  fame  Form  of  Expref- 
fion  which  is  blamed  in  our  Office  for  Confirmation, 
was  commonly  ufed  by  Chrift  and  his  Apoftles. 
"  Our  Lord,  fays  Dr.  Doddridge^  tho'  he  knew  the 
"  Wickednefs  of  Jtidas^  often  addrefies  himfelf  to 
''  the  whole  Body  of  his  Apoftks,  as  if  they  were 
''  all  his  faithful  Servants,  and  makes  gracious 
^  Declarations  and  Promifes  to  the  whole  Society^ 

O  which 


(C 


DEFENDED. 

Sect.  "  which  could  by  no  Means  be  applicable  to  this 
IT.  <t  corrupt  and  wretched  Member  of  it."  Other 
Quotations  to  the  fame  Purpofe,  from  the  fame 
Author,  are  given  us  by  Mr.  White,  He  then 
remarks  :  "  If  this  be  admitted  (as  I  fancy  it  will) 
*'  by  my  Anfwerer  •,  if  he  grants  that  Gentleman 
"  (i^x.'Doidridge)  that  our  Lord,  on  divers  Occafions 
"  did  fpeak  to  the  Twelve  in  fuch  Terms  as  were, 
"  and,  which  is  more,  he  knew^  were  no  Way  ap- 
"  plicable  to  the  Traitor— how  can  he  think  it 
*'  wrong,  and  fuch  an  unwarrantable  Thing,  as 
"  he  pretends  to  do,  in  the  Bifhops,  at  Con- 
"  firmation,  to  declare,  before  the  whole  Aflem- 
*'  bly  offering  themfelves  to  be  confirmed,  that 
God  had  "oouchfafed  to  regenerate  thofe  his  Ser- 
vants by  Water  and  the  Holy  Ghaft^  and  to  give 
them  the  For givenefs  of  all  their  SinSy  &c.  If  indeed 
he  (the  Bifhop)  was  to  declare  to  each  indivi- 
dual Perfon,  by  himfelf  that  God  had  regenera- 
ted him  in  particular,  with  the  Holy  Ghoft,  and 
"  forgiven  hijn  all  his  Sins,  it  would  be  a  different 
"  Cafe." 

It  might  have  been  not  amifs,  if  the  Dodlor, 
"who  fo  often  fiourifhes  away  with  Extradls  from 
the  Dijfenting  Gentleman  and  Mr.  Peirce^  had  care- 
fully attended  to  Mr.  White's  Defences  againft  the 
Objedlions  of  the  former,  and  to  Dr.  Grey's  Anlwer 
to  the  latter ;  in  which  Cafe,  I  cannot  but  think 
that  fome  of  his  Quotations  from  thofe  Authors 
would  have  been  fpared. 


iC 


SECT, 


THE    APPEAL  99 

SECTION    III. 


THE  Defign  of  the  next  Section  of  the  Appeal  Sect, 
was  to  fhew,  by  a  particular  Application  of     lil- 
the  general   Dodlrine   of  Epifcopacy,    '  that  the 

*  Church  in  America^  without  an  Epifcopate^  is 
'  necefTarily  deftitute  of  a  regular  Government,  and 
*'  cannot  enjoy  the  Benefits  of  Ordination  and  Con- 

*  iirmation.'  This  is  a  natural  Confequence  of  our 
Principles  ;  and  one  would  think  that  no  Perfon 
would  venture  to  difpute  it.  But  yet  Dr.  Chauncy^ 
who  feems  to  have  proceeded  upon  the  Plan  of 
difputing  every  Thing  that  is  advanced  in  the  Appeal, 
has  fhewn  that  he  is  able  to  offer  Objedions  even 
to  this. 

I  pajfed  over  the  fubje6t  of  Confirmation  without 
Enlargement^  defignedly  ♦,  becaufe  I  fuppofed,  that, 
with  fome  of  my  Readers,  the  Importance  of  that 
facred  Rite  would  not  be  acknowledged— or,  in 
the  Dodtor's  Phrafeology,  that  the  Subje6t  v/as 
not  fuited  to  the  Colony-i'afte,  It  is  not  a  Matter 
of  Wonder  to  me,  that  an  Inflance  of  fuch  Com- 
plaifance  to  the  Reader,  fhould  be  difagreeable  to 
luch  an  Anfwerer  as  the  Dodlor  ;  who  hints  his 
Diflike  that  the  more  important  Points  of  Govern- 
ment and  Ordination  are,  as  he  fays,  "  immediately 
*'  proceeded  to,"  making  a  Participle  pafTive  from 
"  a  Verb  neuter — Liberties  of  which  Kind,  I  find 
him  frequently  taking  without  Ceremony. 

Before 


|oo  D  E  F  E  N  D  E  D. 

Sect.  Before  he  enters  upon  the  proper  Bufinefs  of 
^'  "  this  Sedion,  he  thinks  fit  to  make  Two  Remarks. 
The  lirft,  in  p.  ^6^  and  running  on  to  p.  59,  was 
occafioned  by  my  faying,  that  '  none  but  Bifliops 
'  have  a  Right  to  govern  the  Church:*  Whereupon 
he  reprefents  the  Church  of  England  as*  having  no 
Authority  that  is  purely  fpiritual^  every  Thing  of 
that  Kind  being  confidered  by  him  as  abforbed  in 
the  King's  Supremacy.  But  this  Matter  has  al- 
ready been  placed  in  fo  full  and  clear  a  Light,  that 
to  enlarge  upon  it  here  would  be  paying  but  an  ill 
Compliment  to  the  Reader's  Underftanding. 

His  other  Remark  in  p.  59,  which  he  confeffes 
to  be  not  ejfentially  important^  relates  to  the  Dif- 
ference betwixt  the  Complaint  as  made  at  the  Head  of 
this  Se^ion^^  and  its  Appearance  in  the  Explanation 
that  follows.  'The  Ground  of  the  Complaint^  fays  he, 
as  there  fpecified^  is  this^  the  Church  of  England  in 
America^  being  without  Bifljops^  muft  for  that  Reafon 
*"  be  without  Government  and  Ordination:'  Whereas 
the  Juftification  of  this  Complaint  does  not  proceed 
upon  thefuppofition  either  that  they  have-  ■  no  Govern- 
ment,' or  can  have  '  no  Ordination-,'  but  that  their 
Government  without  Bifhops  is  incomplete  and  infuffi- 
cient^  and  that  Ordination  cannot  be  had  without 
Difficulty^  Danger  and  Expence^  p.  60.  By  the 
Head  if  the  SeMon^  I  fhould  underftand  the  T'itlt 
of  the  Se6lion,  or  at  leaft  its  firft  Paragraph.  But 
the  Complaint  as  fpecified  in  the  Title  of  the  Se61:ion 
is,  that  without  an  Epifcopate  the  Church  in  Ame- 
rica 'is  deftitute  of  a  regular  Government^' implying 
that  it  might  be  under  a  Government  that  is  im- 
perfed  and  irregular.  If  therefore,  as  the  Do(5lor 
.  fays,  the  Jufiification  of  the  Complaint  proceeds  upon 
the  Suppojition^  that  without  Bifhops  the  Government 

of 


THE    APPEAL  loi 

pf  the  Church  is  incomplete  and  infuficient^  it  exaclly  Sect. 
anfwers  to  the  Title  of  the  Se6lion.  Indeed  in  p.  ^^' 
27,  I  had  faid  that  '  the  American  Church,  while 
'  without  Bilhops,  mull  be  without  Government.' 
If  he  had  this  general  Expreflion  in  his  View,  he 
.did  wrong  in  faying  it  was  at  the  Head  of  the 
Sedion  -,  tor  few  of  his  Readers,  I  believe,  would 
ever  think  of  looking  for  the  Head  of  a  Thing, 
in  the  Middle  of  it. 

I  TOOK  Notice  that  this  general  Proportion, 
^  that  without  Bifhops  the  Church  of  England  in 
*  America  is  without  Government,'  is  to  be  under- 
ftood  in  a  qualified  Senfe :  But  furely  there  can  be 
no  Inconfiftency  in  this.  It  is  very  common,  and 
-agreeable  to  Itridl  Method,  lirft  to  lay  down  a 
general  Proportion,  and  then  to  mark  out  the 
Exceptions  and  Limitatiops  with  which  it  is  to  be 
iinderftood, 

As  to  Ordination^  the  general  Proportion  is 
true  without  any  Exception.  For  without  Bifhops, 
upon  the  Principles  of  the  Church  of  England^ 
there  cannot  be  Ordination  in  a  fingle  Inftance. 
The  Docftor  here  diftinguifhes  ♦,  710  Ordination^  and 
Ordination  with  Inconvenience  and  Charge^  are  quite 
different  things.  But  he  feems  to  labour  under  a 
great  Confufion  of  Ideas,  whenever  he  talks  upon 
the  Subject  of  Ordination.  The  Pofition  which  he 
controverts  is  this,  that  there  can  be  no  Ordinati- 
ons in  America  without  Bifliops  in  America  -,  in 
Oppofition  to  which  he  argues,  that .  we  may  have 
Ordinations  in  America^  witjf  Inco??venience  and 
Charge.  But  how  can  we,  without  Bifliops,  have 
Ordinations  in  America  ?  Why,  fays  my  very  logi- 
cal Opponent,  by  having  them   in  England,     Yet 

-  he 


102  DEFENDED. 

Sect,  he  unluckily  acknowledges  in  p.  56,  as  to  Confir- 
^'  mation^  that  we  mufi  be  in  Want  of  it  without  Bi- 
jhops^  hecaufe  they  only  can  perform  this  Piece  of 
Service.  If  fo,  one  would  be  apt  to  think,  in  like 
Manner,  as  to  Ordination^  that  we  muft  be  in 
Want  of  it  without  Bifhops,  becaufe  they  only 
can  perform  this  Piece  of  Service.  But  no  :  Or- 
dination, it  feems,  may  be  had  Hill,  with  Inconve- 
nience and  Charge  •,  and  fo  fay  I,  may  Confirma- 
tion. But  the  Truth  is,  neither  of  them  can  be 
had  in  America^  otherwife  than  by  having  them  in 
Europe.  Let  us  fuppofe,  for  an  Iliuftration,  that 
the  civil  Authority  Ihould  put  a  Stop  to  every 
Printing-Prefs  in  England -^  and  that  fome  Perfon 
fhould  complain  of  the  Hardfhip  of  this,  that  fo 
conftitutional  a  Right  as  the  Liberty  of  the  Pref$ 
Ihould  be  refufed  to  Englilhmen  :  Would  not  an 
Objedlor  appear  in  a  ridiculous  Light,  that  Ihould 
affirm  the  Liberty  of  the  Prefs  was  not  refufed, 
but  only  attended  with  Inconvenience  and  Charge  \ 
and  explain  himfelf  by  faying  that  a  Man  might  go 
to  Holland  or  Ruffta^  and  there  find  a  Prefs  that 
would  ferve  him  ?  And  yet  I  cannot  conceive  that 
it  makes  any  material  Difi^erence,  whether  the 
Subje6t  of  fuch  reafoning  be  Ordination,  or  the 
Liberty  of  the  Prefs. 

Under  the  Head  of  Government^  I  attempted  to 
Ihew,  that  although  Prefbyters  may  have  a  fubor- 
dinate  Authority,  yet  unalienable  epifcopal  Au- 
thority was  moreover  neceffary  to  anfwer  the 
Ends  of  Government  in  an  epifcopal  Church 
-*— and  that  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Co- 
'Jlonies  greatly  fuffers  for  Want  of  this  Authority. 
The  Dodor's  Remark  is,  that  if  Prefbyters  may 
have  a  fubordinate  Authority,  the  Church  is  ftill  in 

a  lefs 


THE    APPEAL  103 

a  lefs  deplorable  State  than  was  reprefented  by  the  Sect. 
Complaint^  as  at  firft  werded.  How  the  Complaint  ^^^' 
was  at  firft  worded^  has  been  Ihewn ;  but  if  the 
State  of  the  Church  here  is  not  fo  deplorably  bad, 
with  Refpe(El  to  its  Government,  as  if  Prefbyters 
could  have  no  fubordinate  Authority  at  all  ♦,  yet 
that  is  no  Reafon  why  we  fhould  not  endeavour  to 
make  it  better  than  it  is,  nor  is  it  any  Reafon  why 
others  Ihould  oppofe  the  Attempt. 

The  Dodtor  affedls  to  think  the  Matter  would 
not  be  much  mended,  by  the  Refidence  of  Bifhops. 
^he  Church  at  Home^  fays  he,  is  in  this  Refpe^^  in 
as  lamentable  a  State  as  the  Church  in  America,  ^e 
Liturgy  itfelf  fuppofes  their  Difcipline  to  be  in  a 
wretched  Condition^  p.  62 — alluding,  I  imagine,  to 
the  Commination-Office.  That  the  Difcipline  of 
the  Church  of  England  is  defedlive  in  fome  Ref- 
pe6ls,  and  below  the  primitive  Standard,  She  has 
the  Candor  to  confefs  :  If  others,  whofe  Difcipline 
is  by  no  Means  more  perfect,  would  confefs  the 
fame,  it  would  be  much  for  their  Credit.  But 
the  Want  of  primitive  Difcipline  in  the  Church  at 
Home,  is  no  Proof  that  the  Want  of  it  is  not  ftill 
greater  in  the  Colonies,  nor  that  the  Want  cannot 
in  fome  Degree  be  remedied  by  the  propofed  Epif- 
•copate.  We  think  that  a  ftridl  Difcipline,  with 
Regard  to  the  American  Clergy,  might  be  exer- 
cifed  under  an  Epifcopate.  This  is  certainly  ex- 
peded ;  it  is  an  important  Part  of  our  Plan  ;  and 
that  American  Bifhops  would  difappoint  us  in  this 
Relpcdt,  none  have  a  Right  to  declare,  until  the 
Experiment  fhall  have  been  made. 

To  fhew  that  thefe  Expedations  are  vain,  the 
learned  Dr.  Whitby  is  quoted  for  thefe  Words  : 
**  the  Church  of  England  obferves  no  Difcipline." 

But 


IG4 

Sect. 


DEFENDED. 

But  if  it  be   true,  that   the    Church  obferves  nd 
Difcipline  at  Home,  it  will  not    folloWy  that,  in 
very  different  Circumllances,  She  will  not  exercife 
the  Difcipline  here  which  is  propofed  and  expe6led^= 
when  Bifhops  fhall  be  appointed  to  refide  in  Jme- 
rica.     But  is   the  Doctor  certain,  that  the  learned 
Commentator  fays  what  he  afcribes  to  him  ?  I  afk 
the  Queflion,  not  only    bccaufe  Whitby  mentions 
not    "  the  Church  of  England'*    in    the  Paifage 
refered  to,  but  becaufe  it  appears  to  me,  that  wliat 
is  there  faid  of  a  Church  without  Difciphne,  the 
Commentator  fays   not  in  his  own  Perfon,  but  in 
the  Charadler  of  a  DifTenter,  who  is  introduced  as 
alTigning  it  for  a  Reafon  of  his  Separation  froni 
the  Church  of  England.     Whether  I  am   right  in 
this  Opinion,   let  the  Reader  judge.     After  men- 
tioning the  Cafe  of  a  Jew,  who  was  governed   by 
an  erroneous    Confcience,    Dr.  Whithy   obf :rves : 
'  this  is  fo  far  from  being  an  unparallel  Cafe,  that 
*  it  is  the  very  Cafe  of  the  Romanifts^  ufmg  ftill 
'  the   anointing  of  the  fick— of  the   AnahapiftSy 
'  dipping  them  that  are  baptized— of  the  Greek 
'  Churchy  refufmg  to  eat  Things   ftrangled    and 
'  Blood,  out  of  a  Reverence  to  the  apoftolical  In- 
'  junction — of  the  Diffenters^  ufmg  Prayer  by  the 
^  Spirit,  or  conceived  Prayer,  out  of  Reverence 
'  to  the  Command,   to  pray  in  the  Holy  Ghofi^  and 
abftaining  from  Communion  with  that  Church 
which  obferves  no  Church  Difcipline ^  out  of  Ref- 
pe6t  to  the  Command,  to  purge  the  evil  from 
among  us  •,  for  all  this  is  done  by  them  out  of 
a   mifiaken   Reverence  to  a    divine  Authority, 
which  they  conceive  obliging  to  themf ."  Now 
what  is  here  probably,  at  leaft  very  polill^yf  in- 
tended 


t  Note  on  Rom,  XIV.  6, 


DEFENDED.  105 

tended  only  to  exprefs  a  Conceit  of  the  DifTen-  Sect. 
ters,  the  Dodtor,  by  a  Stretch  of  his  Preroga-  ^^* 
live,  after  making  the  neceffary  Correftions  and 
Amendments,  forms  into  a  pofitive  Allcrtion,  and 
puts  it  into  the  Mouth  of  Dr.  Whitby^  giving  i^ 
all  the  Marks  of  a  literal  Qiiotation.  Yet  after  all, 
fuppofmg  Whithy  had  taken  it  into  his  Head  to 
ailert,  what  the  Do6tor,  or  rather  Mr.  Peirce^  from 
whom  the  Quotation  appears  to  have  been  taken, 
makes  him  to  affert  •,  it  will  only  follow,  that  he 
afierted  of  the  Church  of  England^  what  is  not  true 
of  that,  or  any  other  Church  in  the  Univerfe.  For 
there  is  no  Church  but  has  fome  Canons  and  Laws 
to  regulate  the  Behaviour  of  its  Members,  and 
fom^etimes,  at  lead,  puts  them  in  Execution  ;  and 
in  fo  doing,  obferves  and  exerciics  Difcipiine.  Un- 
lefs  therefore  it  can  be  proved,  that  the  Church  of 
England  has  no  Laws,  or  that  none  of  her  Laws 
are  ever  inforced,  it  cannoft  juilly  be  aiferted  that 
She  obferves  no  Difcipiine. 

.  In*  explaining  the  Nature  of  ecclefiaftical  Au- 
thority, I  had  advanced  this  Proportion,  '  the 
'  Power  of  the  Church  is  of  a  fpiritual  Natiiie.' 
The  Truth  of  chis  is  admited  by  Dr.  Ckauncy  -,  but 
then  he  immediately  roufes  himfelf  and  his  Readers 
with  the  following  Exclamation.  //  is  really  afto- 
nifljing^  that  he  (the  Author  of  the  Appeal)  jhottld 
make  fpiritual  Cenfures  the  utmnfi  Effe^ '  cf  the 
Power  of  the  Church  of  England  I  And  it  i^  equal- 
ly ^7?^;///??/>/^  tome,  that  he  iliould  not  fee,  that, 
in  the  Place  refered  to,  I  was  confidering  the  Church 
in  it^riginal  State,  before  it  was  taken  under  the 
ProteJ^lbn  of  the  civil  Power.  I  v/as  not  fpeaking 
of  the  Church  of  England  m  its  prefent  Situation, 
fupported  and  eftablifhed  by  the  Laws  of  the  King- 

P  dona 


ic6  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,   dom  •,  nor  of  any  other   Church,  in  fimilar  Cir- 
^^^*     cumflances.     All  Churches,  whether  Epifcopalian 
or  Prefbyterian,  which  enjoy  the  Benefit  of  a  civil 
Eftablifhment,    have  their  Decrees   feconded  and 
inforced,  in  fome  Inftances,  by  the  fecular  Arm. 
And  if  the  Church  of   England  rejects    not   the 
friendly  Afliflance  of  temporal  Authority  ♦,  neither 
does  the  Church  of  Scotland^  nor  that  of  Genevdy 
nor  any  other,  to  whom  it  is  offered.    This  Obfer- 
vation  I  beg  Leave  to  illuilrate  and  confirm  by  an 
Example  from  Geneva^  which  was  produced  in  the 
Conference  at  Hampton-Court.     "  One  Baltbafar^ 
*'  a   rich  Widow  in   Geneva^  had   a  Ball  in  her 
"  Houfe.     This   DiverJion  is   a   great  Crime  by 
"  CalvirCs  Difcipline.    It  happened  that  a  Syndick^ 
**  one  of   the  Four  chief   Magiftrates,    and  one 
''  Kenrick  an  Elde}\  were  Two  of  thofe  that  danced. 
"  When  Cahin  underftood  Avhat  v/as  done,    he 
"  convented  them   before  a  Confiftory  •,  and  tho' 
they  were  delated  by  no  Body,  the  Oath  ex  Offi- 
cio was  put  to  them  to  extort  Matter  of  Fad. — 
"  In  Hiort,  Henrick  the  Eider— was  turned  out  of 
"  his  Office,  and  /;;2/)r//tf;?^i  for  three  Days.    The 
"  Syndtck  was  likewlfe  fuipended  from  the  Execu- 
"  tion  of  his  Office,  'till  he  had  given  fome  Proofs 
*'  of  his  Repentance  for  being  at  the  Bali,    This 
"  Man  refigiied  to  the  Confiftory,  did  Penance 
'•  upon   their  Admonition,  and  fo  prevented  his 
"  Commitment.     There  were  feveral  others,  who 
**  being  examined  by  Calvin  upon  their  Oath,  con- 
"  feffed  they  were  at  this  dancing  Entertainment, 
"  upon  which  they  were  all  fent  to  Prifon*."    We 
fee  here  that  Galvin  fcrupled  not  to  make  Ufe  of 
that  temporal  Power  granted  him  by  the  Hepub- 
lic,    but  would  depofe  and  iyn-prifon   Men,    as  he 

thought 

•  Collier's  Ecckfiallical  HiHory,  VoL  II.  p.  602. 


DEFENDED.  107^ 

thought  it  would  beft  anfwer  the  Purpofes  of  his  Sect. 
Difcipline.     And  now,  before  I  return  from  Gene-     ^^^* 
*vay  I  will  only  obferve,  that  the  temporal  Effe6ts 
of  Excommunication  there,  are  as  dreadful,  as  the 
Do6tor,  in  the  Words  of  the  Bijfenting  Gentleman^ 
has  reprefented  them  to  be  in  England. 

In  fpeaking  of  Excommunication  and  ecclefi- 
aflical  Cenfures,  I  had  obierved,  that  in  this  Age 
they  have  loft  much  of  their  Weight ;  which   is 
owing  to  certain  Caufes  that  were  briefly  intimated* 
The  Dodlor   brifkly  replies,  it-  is  readily  acknow^ 
ledged  the  Difcipline'  of  the  Church  is  held  in  Con- 
tempt  hy  Multitudes.     But  furely  he  muft  know, 
that  Men  may  defpife  Things  that  are  not  in  them- 
felves  contemptible,  and  that  they  may  affe5f  to  def- 
pife Things,  at  the  fame  Time  that  they  really  look 
upon  them  to  be  venerable.   I  have  met  with  Per- 
fons  who  appeared  to  hold  the  Difcipline  exercifed 
by  the  ChurcBes  in  the  Colonies  in  as  great  Contempt, 
as  the  Do6tor,  or  any  of  his  Party,  can  hold  that 
of  the  Church  of  England,     If  Infidels  and  Liber- 
'tines  laUgh  to  fee  how  it  is  exercifed ;  we  may,  in  a 
'  great  Meafure,    thank  thofe,  who  have  taken  fo 
much  ungenerous  Pains  to  reprefent  it  in  a  ridicu- 
lous Light. 

IT  would  he  a  Shame,  fays  the  Do6lor)  for  a 
Man  to  fpeak  in  its  Defence.  We  acknowledge 
the  Difcipline  of  the  Church  to  be  defedlive,  and 
fo  far  we  undertake  not  to  defend  it : — I  wifh  fome 
others  had  the  fame  Ingenuity.  But  although  we 
pretend  not  to  defe7id  it  in  every  Refped,.yet  much 
may  be  faid,  and  has  been  often  faid,  to  excufe  it. 
The  Do6lor  takes  for  granted  that  no  Attempt  for 
/^f^?-(/}  has- been  ever  made.  But  in  this  he  aflumes 

P  ?  more* 


io8  THE    APPE  AL 

Sect,   more,  than  we  choofe  to  allow  him.    He  muft  be  a 
"^'     Stranger  to  our  Hiftory,  who  knows  not  that  fome^; 
Attempts   have  been   made  with  this  View ;  and 
there  may  have  been  Ibme  fecret  ones,  of  which  ♦^; 
Hiftory  does  not  inform  us.     Does   he  think  that  -^ 
nothing  can  be  attempted,  without  public  Noiie  andt 
Clamour  ?    Or,    is  it  reafonabie  to   be  noify  and  i 
clamorous,  when  it  is  known  that  it  can  anfwer  no  [ 
valuable  Purpcfe  ?  May  not  an  indilcreet  Zeal,  in- 
this,  as  well  as  in  other  Cafes,  do  more  Mifchief- 
than  Service  ?    We  are  not  afhamed   to  confefs, 
that  we  wifh  for  the  farther  Improvement  of  every 
Thing  belonging  to  the  Church  -,  of  our  Difci- 
plinc,  of  our  common  Tranflation  of  the  Bible, 
of  our  Liturgy  and  public  Offices.;  which  we  hope 
in  due  Time  to  obtain,  in  a  regular  and  peaceable 
Way  •,  until  which  Time  we  fhall  continue  to  Ufe 
them  in  their  prefent  State  : — Looking  upon  the 
Difcipline  of  the  Church,  defe6tive  as  it  is,  to  be 
equal  with  that  of   our  Neighbours — confidering 
our  Tranflation  of  the  Bible,  however  erroneous  in 
in  fome  particular  PafTages,  as  tolerable  upon  the 
whole — and  efteeming  our  Liturgy,  although  ca- 
,    pable  of  Hill  farther  Improvement,  to  be  the  beft 
upon  Earth. 

The  Do(5lor  fpends  fome  Pages  more,  in  difplay- 
ing  the  Qualities  and  Condition  of  a  Thing,  which 
he  profelTes  to  believe  has  no  Exiftence,  i.  e. 
Difcipline  in  the  Church  of  England  •,  but  as  they 
confift  chiefly  of  Extra^s  from  the  Dijfenting  Gen- 
tleman^  I  muft  refer  thofe,  who  are  defirous  of  fee- 
ing particular  anfwers  to  thofe  Extradls,  to  Mr. 
White^  I  fhall  take  Leave  of  this  Subje6t  with 
obferving,  that  in  thi§  Part  of  his  Performance, 
the   Dodtor  fviffers  his  unbridled  Imagination  to 

run 


D  E  F  E  N  D  E  D.  109 

run  away  with  his  Reafon ;  and  that  his  whole  Sect, 
Reprefentation  is  manifeftly  fo  uncandid,  fo  par-  ^^- 
tial,  lo  hyperbolical,  fa  ranting,  and,  I  may  add, 
fo  impertinent  to  his  proper  Bufinefs,  that  it  merits 
a  Rebuke,  rather  than  a  Refutation.  If  he  fhould 
ever  again  undertake  to  give  the  Charader  of  the 
Church  of  England^  or  of  her  Clergy  •,  I  recom- 
mend it  to  him  ferioufly  to  attend  to  the  Apoftle's 
Diredlion  :  "  Let  all  Bitternefs,  and  Wrath,  and 
"  Anger,  and  Clamour,  and  Evil-fpeaking,  be  put 
"  away  from  you,  with  all  Malice*." 


In  p.  69,  I  am  charged  with  Inconfiflency,  and 
the  Charge   is  thus  fupported.     I  had  faid  •,  '  In 
'  this  State  of  Things,  the  Refloration  of  the  pri- 
'  midve  Difciphne  feems  to  be  a  Matter  rather  ta 
'  be  wifhed  for  and  defired,  than  to  be  rationally 
*  attempted  by:  thofe  in  Authority.*     And  yet^  fays 
the  Dodlor,    it;  is  propofed^    that  thievery  Thing 
%vhich  cannpt  rationally  be  attempted,  Jhould 
not  only  be  attempted^  hut  carried  into  EffeB,     The 
Thing  that  ia  our  Opinion,  cannot  rationally  be 
attempted,  is  the  Reftoration  of  the  primitive  Difci- 
plifie  •,  theThing  therefore /^r^^d?/^^,  according  to  this 
Reprefentation,  is  not  only  to  athmpt^  but  to  carry 
into  EffeEi  (as  indeed  moft  Attempts  are  propofed 
with  a  View  of  carrying  Something  into  Effedt) 
the  Reftoration  of  the  primitive  Difcipline.     And 
yet,  notwithftanding  that  we  are  allowed  to  have 
propofed  this,  we  are  in  the  very  fame  Page  blamed 
for  )iot  propofmg  it-r-for  forming  a  Plan  not  adapt- 
ed to  thtGofpeUInfiitution  of  Difcipline^  which  we 
all  know  was  the  primitive  StSind^ird.  The  Talk, 
I  own,  is  fomewhat  difficult,  to  juftify  ourfelves 
for  propofmg  and  not  propofing,  for  attempting 
'-i>i;  ;  and 

*ij>L  iv.  31. 


no  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect,  and  not  attempting,  the  fame  Thing  -,  and  it  is 
^^^'  rather  unkindly  impofed  vponus.  But  if  we  might 
be  allowed  to  proceed  In  our  own  Way,  we  believe 
we  could  fatisfy  all  reafonable  Perfons.  Our  Opi- 
nion is,  that  in  the  prefent  State  of  Things,  the 
Reftoration  of  the  primitive  Difcipline  cannot  be 
attempted,  with  any  Profped  of  Succefs.  If  the 
Do6lor  thinks  otherwife,  let  him  try  the  Expe- 
riment with  his  own  Congregation,  which  I  fup- 
pofe  to  be  not  more  than  comihonly  intradlable ; 
and  when  the  Attempt  is  fairly  carried  into  Effe5f^' 
if  he  will  publifh  a  Narrative  of  his  Procefs,  fo 
fuccefsful  an  Example  may  animate  and  dired  o- 
thers ;  and  then,  if  they  refufe  to  follow  it,  he 
may  blame  them  with  a  better  Grace.  We  are 
farther  of  Opinion,  that  although  it  is  proper  and 
advifeable,  for  many  Reafons,  to  leave  the  Difci- 
pline of  the  American  Church,  fo  far  as  it  relates 
to  the  Laity,  in  its  prefent  State ;  yet,  that  it  is 
neceflary,  and  at  the  fame  Time  very  pradicablej 
with  the  Advantage  of  an  Epifcopate,  to  eftabhjfh 
a  ftridl  Difcipline  over  the  Clergy ;  and  therefore 
it  is  intended  that  '  the  Bilhop's  Power  over  them 
'  fhall  be  as  full  and  compleat,  as  the  Laws  and 
*  Canons  of  the  Church  dired.' 

But,  is  not  godly  Difcipline  as  needful  for  the 
Laity  as  the  Clergy  ?  Some  godly  Difcipline  for  the 
Laity  we  already  have ;  we  can  repel  from  the 
Communion  thofe  whom  we  difcover  to  come  with 
an  unworthy  Diipofition ;  and,  in  this  Country  in 
particular,  we  DARE  to  repel,  any  Blafphemer 
the  three  Kingdoms  afford^  even  when  he  comes  to 
demand  it  as  a  Qualification  for  an  Office  in  the  Ar- 
my or  Fleet.  Other  Kdis.  of  Difcipline  we  are  able 
to  exercife  over  the  Laity  -,  and,  confidering  the 

Provifion 


m. 


DEFENDED.  1 1 1 

Provifion  made  by  our  Laws  for  the  Punifhment  Sect. 
of  many  of  thofe  Crimes,  which  in  the  primitive 
Ages  had  no  other  Rcftraint  than  the  Difciphne  of 
the  Church,  any  farther  Exertion  of  ecclefiaftical 
Authority  over  the  Laity,  is  perhaps  rendered  lefs 
neceflary.  Thefe  Sentiments  are  not  contradidled 
in  the  Appeal  •,  for  therein  I  did  not  make  it  one 
main  Article  of  my  Complaint^  that  '  the  People, 
'  being  fenfible  of  the  Clergy's  Want  of  Power, 
*  find  themfelves  free  from  all  Reftraints  of  eccle- 
'  fiaftical  Authority,'  I  only  reprefented  this  as 
being  in  Reality  the  Cafe. 

BISHOPS  undoubtedly,  as  Siiccejfors  to  the  A- 
foftles^  are  as  much  vefted  with  Authority  to  govern 
the  Laity  as  the  Clergy  •,  but,  after  the  Example  of 
St.  Paul,  they  may  think  themfelves  not  obliged 
to  exercife  it  with  Severity,  fince  it  is  given  them 
'-  to  Edification,  and  not  to  Deflrudionf."  If 
therefore  they  fhould  judge  any  Plan,  for  a  greater 
Extenfion,  or  a  more  vigorous  Exertion,  of  eccle- 
fiaftical  Pov/er  over  txhe  American  Laity,  would 
tend  more  to  Beftrufuon  than  to  Edificatio7iy  they 
are  warranted  to  reje(^t  it  •,  and  if  they  have  a  Right 
to  rejedl  it,  they  may  give  Affurances  of  iuch  a 
Rejection.  But  does  not  this  Diftinction  imply 
that  the  Church-Clergy  are  much  vjorfe^  than  the 
Laity  ?  All  that  I  can  conceive  to  be  implied  in 
it  is,  that  greater  Advantages  are  expefed  from^ 
increafing  tlie  Reftraints  of  the  Clergy,  than  of 
the  Laity ;  or,  at  leaft,  that  in  the  Cafe  of  the 
Clergy,  \t  is  more  pradic able. 


The  long  Extrad  from  Biiliop   Burnet^  begi 
ning  p.  70,  Ihews  that  the  Bilhop,  at  the  7  ime 


begin- 
ne 
of 


f  2  Cor*  xiii.  IQ. 


112  THE    A-PPE  A  L 

Sect,  of  writing  it,  thought  there  were  many  Things  irt 
the  Church  that  wanted  Amendment  -,  and  if  he 
had  undertaken,  with  the  fame  Freedom,  to  give  his 
Opinion  of  the  Diffenters,  he  would  probably  have 
prefented  us  with  a  no  lefs  dark  and  gloomy  De- 
fcription.  The  Qiiotation  from  Mr.  Peirce,  about 
the  Right  of  Patronage,  is  as  foreign  from  the 
Dodor's  Bufmefs,  as  an  Argument  would  be  about 
the  Colour  of  Aaron's  Linen  Ephod.  Therefore 
^  -pafTing  over  this,  and,  for  the  fame  Reafon  the 
Qiiotation  from  Dr.  Croffs^,  which  he  might 
have  told  us  he  borrowed  from  the  Biffenting  Gen-- 
tleman^  I  fhall  proceed  to  what  more  nearly  con- 
cerns me. 

Whether  we  are  right  or  wrong  in  that  Part 
of  our  Plan  which  relates  to  the  Laity,  it  might 
be  expeded  that  a  Propofal  for  bringing  the  Clergy 
under  a  ftrid  Difcipline,  would  meet  with  no  Ob- 
jedions  from  thofe,  who  frequently  reproach  us 
with  the  Want  of  it.  For  certainly  it  is  better  that 
fome  Part  of  any  Society  fhould  be  duly  governed, 
than  that  no  Part  Ihould.  But  we  arc  fo  unlucky 
as  to  be  oppofed,  as  well  in  our  Scheme  for  exer- 
cifmg  Dilcipline  over  the  Clergy,  as  for  not  exer- 
cifmg  it  with  more  Severity  over  the  Laity. 

In  p.  75  and  "]-],  the  Do6bor  thinks  to  incum- 
ber us  with  this  Objedion,  that  our  Plan  for  the 
Government  of  the  Clergy  cannot  be  executed  in 
the  Manner  we  propofe,  unlefs  the  eftahlijhed  Mode 

of 

§  Dr.  Crofts  was  anfwered  by  Bifhop  Burnet,  in  *'  a  modeft 
"  Survey  of  a  Difcourfe,  entitled,  The  naked  Truth,  or  the  true 
**  State  of  the  primitive  Churchy  by  an  humble  Moderator.''  See 
a  chronological  Account  of  the  Works  of  Bifhop  Burnet,  fuf- 
fixed  to  the  lall  Edition  of  his  Hijlory  of  his  o^-wn  Times,  in 
4  Vols.  8vo. 


DEFENDED.-  113 

of  Bifcipline  Jhould  he  fo  changed^  as  to  he  quite  dif-  Sect. 
feroit  from  what  it  is  in  England.  I  am  glad  to  ^^' 
fee  it  granted  that  the  Church  of  England  has  an 
eftabliflied  Mode  of  Difcipline,  fo  foon  after  a  De- 
nial that  "^Ix^  has  any  Difcipline  at  all.  It  fliews 
that  the  Dodlior  is  not  incapable  of  feei-ng  and  re- 
tracting his  Errors.  But  as  to  the  Mode  of  our 
Difcipline,  he  need  not  give  himfelf  any  Concern 
on  that  Account.  It  has  always  been  intended,  that 
the  Mode  of  it  here,  under  an  Epifcopate,  fhall 
be  different  from  what  it  is  in  England,  The  EfTen- 
tials  will  be  the  fame,  but  the  Manner  of  Admi- 
niftration  will  differ,  in  many  Refpeds.  The  Bi- 
Ihop's  Authority  here,  will  be  purely  Ecclefiafli- 
cal ;  but  at  Home,  temporal  Power,  a  Non-Ef- 
fential,  is  joined  with  it.  There.,  many  tedious 
Forms  mull  be  attended  to  and  obferved  ;  but 
here.,  every  Thing  may  be  done  in  a  more  fummary 
Way,  and  no  farther  Delay  will  be  neceffary,  than 
what  will  be  required  for  a  due  Information,  con- 
cerning the  Fadls  upon  which  Camplaints  fhall  be 
founded. 

BUT.,  fays  the  Dodor,  p.  77,  //  an  Alteration  is 
to  be  made.,  in  the  Mode  of  exercifmg  Difcipline,  ^ 
it  is  infinitely  reafonahle.,  it  Jhould  firft  take  Place  at 
Home.,  where  it  is  moft  needed.  When  it  is  effe^ed 
there.,  it  will  he  Time  enough  to  dejire  it  here.  All 
Changes  of  ancient  and  eftabliflied  Ufages  in  any 
Country,  are  found  to  be  extremely  difficult ;  and 
the  Dodtor  feems  not  to  be  aware,  how  many  Laws 
muft  be  repealed  before  fuch  a  Plan  of  Difcipline, 
as  may  be  eafily  carried  into  Effe^  here,  can  be 
executed  in  England — nor  how  nearly,  fuch  an  Al- 
teration may  be  thought  to  affed  the  State.  The 
whole  Syftem  of  ecclefiaftical  Laws  muft  be  new- 

Q^  modeled. 


114  THE    A  PPE  AL 

Sect,  modeled,  and  one  half  of  the  national  Conllituti- 
on  mufl  undergo  a  very  confiderable  Change,  in 
Order  to  which,  not  only  the  Bilhops  and  Clergy, 
but  all  the  Branches  of  the  Legiflature,  mull  be 
convinced  of  the  Utility  and  Safety  of  the  Mea- 
fure — before  this  Propofal  can  take  Place  in  En- 
gland. But  at  the  firft  Settlement  of  an  Epifco^ 
pate  in  the  Colonies,  the  propofed  Alteration  of  the 
cftablilhed  Mode  may  be  introduced,  without  any 
fuch  Difficulties,  and  even  with  as  much  Eafe  as 
"  the  Mode  that  is  pradlifed  at  Home  can  be  intro- 
duced. There  is  therefore  no  Reafon  at  all  for 
waiting  to  fee  it  efFeded  there^  before  we  defire  it 
here ;  much  lefs  is  it  infinitely  reafonahle  to  do  fo. 
If  the  propofed  Mode  is  eligible  in  itfelf,  and  may 
cafily  be  obtained  by  us,  why  fhould  we  wait  for 
thofe  who  cannot  eafily  obtain  it,  to  fet  us  the  Ex- 
ample ? 

In  fpeaking  of  the  Clergy  under  the  Diftindtion 
of  the  Virtuous  and  the  Vicious,  it  was  obferved 
in  the  Appeal  p.  32,  that  '  the  Want  of  Bifhops 

*  to  fuperintend  and  govern  them,  is  obvious  at 

*  firft  View.    If  one  Sort  have  no  need  of  a  Bilhop 

*  to  keep  them  to  their  Duty,  yet  fome  Cafes  will 
.  *  arife  in  the  Difcharge  of  it,  in  which  his  Diredi- 

*  on  will  be  ufeful — and  many  Cafes,  wherein  his 

*  Support  and  Encouragement  will  be  needful — 

*  and  in  all  Cafes,  his  Friendfhip  and  Patronage 

*  will  give  Life  and  Spirit  to  them  in  undergoing 

*  the  Difficulties,  and  performing  the  Duties  of 

*  their  Stations.'  Upon  this  Paflage  Dr.  Chauncy 
makes  the  following  Animadverfion.  But  what  is 
all  this  to  the  Affair  of  Difcipline^  the  grand  Point 
in  View  ?  The  Dolor's  Bu/mefs  here  was^  to  Jhew 
it  to  he  neceffary  that  ftriSi  Dtfcipline  Jhould  he  efta- 

hlijhed 


DEFENDED.  115 

blijhed  with  Refpe£i  to  the  Clergy  ;  and  he  begins  Sect. 
his  /Irgtiment  with  a  Ccfe^  wherein  it  is  not  needed  ^^* 
at  all^  p.  y6.  I  have  no  Objedlions  to. being  re- 
minded of  my  proper  Bufinefs^  when  I  happen  to 
forget,  or  miftake  it  -,  nor  to  being  called  to  Order, 
when  I  wander  from  the  grand  Point  in  View.  I 
can  take  fuch  Interpofitions  kindly,  even  from  Dr. 
Chaunc)\  although  he  has  forfeited  all  Right  to 
interpofe  in  this  Manner,  by  his  own  frequent 
Aberrations  from  the  Point  in  View.  I  would 
only  referve  to  myfelf  the  Privilege  of  being  con- 
vinced of  my  Error,  before  I  retrad:  it  *,  which  in 
the  prefent  Cafe  I  am  not.  If  a  Perfon  were  fpeak- 
ing  of  the  NecefTity  and  Advantages  of  ciinl  Go- 
vernment •,  it  would  be  natural  for  him,  and  not 
impertinent^  to  make  fuch  Obfervations  as  thefe  : 
That  Subjedts  may  be  diftinguiihed  into  the  Virtu- 
ous, and  the  Vicious — that,  although  Government 
is  more  immediately  neceflary  to  reftrain  the  Lat- 
ter, it  will  alfo  have  a  good  Effedl  upon  the  For- 
mer— not  indeed  in  the  fame  Way,  but  by  the  Ap- 
probation, Encouragement  and  Direction  they  will, 
in  general,  receive  from  their  Superiors ;  and  by 
this  means  Benefit  will  redound  to  all  with  whom 
they  are  conneded.  Now  as  Difcipline  in  the 
Church  anfwers  to  Government  in  the  State,  I  fee 
not  why  the  fame  Method  of  lUuftration  may  not 
be  equally  proper  in  both  Cafes  ;  nor  why  the  Sen- 
tence here  quoted  from  the  Appeal^  may  not  be 
pertinent  to  the  propofed  Suhje^  in  Debate.  If  the 
Word  Difcipline  indeed  included  only  the  Idea  of 
Punifhment,  the  Animadverfion  would  be  juft ; 
but  fince,  upon  the  Authority  of  the  beft  Wri- 
ters, it  may  be  extended  to  Government  in  gene- 
ral, in  which  large  Senfe  I  manifeftly  ufed  it,  it  is 
hypcr-critical. 

But 


ii6  T  HE    APPE  AL 

Sect.  But,  it  feems,  the  Advantages  expelled  from 
•^^*  an  Epifcopate  are  chiefly  imaginary.  For  was  there 
now  a  Bijhop  in  whatever  Part  of  America  he  would 
choofe^  the  Clergy  would  notwithftanding  be  varioujly 
dijlant  from  him  feme  Hundreds  of  Miles  ;  infomuch 
that  hut  few  of  them  could  reap  much  Benefit  either 
by  his  Dire^ion.,  Encouragement  or  Patronage.  I  am 
glad  to  find  it  allowed  that  fome  few  of  them  may- 
be near  him,  and  reap  the  Advantages  propofed. 
I  hope  alfo  that  fome  Hundreds  of  Miles  will  be 
found,  upon  the  Trial,  not  to  be  equal  to  fome 
Thoufands.  If  all  the  Clergy  were  to  be  kept  at 
the  Diilance  of  fome  Hundreds  of  Miles,  and  were 
to  have  no  Intercourfe  or  Correfpendence  with  the 
Bifhop,  the  Advantages  expe6led  would  be  truly 
chimerical ;  but  according  to  our  Plan,  there  will 
not  be  a  Clergyman  within  his  Jurifdidlion,  but 
muil  be  perfonally  acquainted  and  maintain  an  In- 
tercourfe, with  him,  in  a  greater  or  lefs  Degree. 

As  to  the  EfFedts  of  the  propofed  Difcipline 
upon  vicious  Clergymen,  it  is  argued  in  p.  yy.,  that 
they  are  not  to  be  expedled  ^here,  becaufe  it  is  ob- 
ferved  that  Multitudes  of  Clergymen  efcapc  Pu- 
nilhment  at  Home.  The  Dodor's  Multitudes  may 
perhaps,  with  more  Propriety,  be  called  fome  \ 
and  that  fome  fhould  efcape,  that  deferve,  Punilh- 
ment,  where  the  Number  of  Clergymen  amounts 
to  twelve  Thoufand,  is  not  to  be  wondered  at.  Are 
there  not  fome  Inftances  of  this  Kind,  under  the 
Prefbyterian  Difcipline  ?  Have  there  not  been  fome, 
even  in  New-England  ?  But  fuppofing  the  Number 
to  be  greater  in  Proportion  in  England^  than  in 
Scotland  or  New-England ;  it  may  be  owing  to  o- 
ther  Caufes,  than  the  comparative  Infufficiency  of 
cpifcopal  Government,  or  the  Inattention  of  the 

_  Bifhops. 


DEFENDED.  117 

Bifhops.  There  are  in  England  fome  Places  that  Sect. 
are  exempted  from  the  Bifhop's  Jurifdidtion  ;  and  ^' 
it  is  greatly  owing  to  the  Refuge  and  Prote<5lion 
which  thofe  Places  afford,  that  fome  vicious  Cler- 
gymen efcape  Punifhment.  But  the  Cafe  of  the 
Clergy  here,  will  always  be  different  from  what  it 
is  in  England  in  fo  many  Refpefts,  that  it  can  never 
be  juftly  argued  that  the  Bifhop's  Power  over  them 
will  be  ineffectual  here,  from  any  Failure  of  it 
there.  It  is  poffible  that  we  may  be  too  fanguine 
in  our  Expedlations  •,  but  if  an  Epifcopate  will 
produce  one  half  of  the  good  Effedts  which  we  ex- 
pe6t  from  it,  it  muft  be  very  delirable  ;  and  we 
cannot  but  look  upon  every  Attempt  to  defeat  the 
Meafures  taken  to  obtain  it,  as  ungenerous  and 
unchriflian. 

As  to  all  the  Purpofes  of  Government,  the  Doc- 
tor thinks  they  might  be  as  well  anfwered  by  Com- 
mijfaries  ^  but  both  Reafon  and  Experience  teach 
the  contrary.  Some  Branches  of  the  epifcopal  Au- 
thority cannot  be  communicated  to  Commiffaries  ^ 
and  where  it  is  otherwife,  Power  in  the  Hands  of 
a  Delegate  of  an  inferior  Rank,  has  never  that 
Weight  and  good  Effedl,  as  when  exercifed  by  the 
Principal.  For  thefe  and  other  Reafons,  when 
Trial  was  formerly  made  of  American  Commiffari- 
es, they  were  found  by  no  Means  to  anfwer  the 
Purpofes  of  their  Appointment. 

The  Public  has  been  affured,  from  Time  to 
Time,  that  none  of  thofe  Spiritual  Courts^  againft 
which  there  is  fo  general  a  Prejudice,  will  be  con- 
nected with  an  American  Epifcopate.  Some  have 
pretended  to  fufped,  that  our  real  Intentions  are 
different  from  our  Profcflions  j   and  Dr.  Chauncy 

thinks 


ji8  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  thinks  he  has  at  lafl  deteded  us.  For  he  has  fa- 
^^*  gacioufly  difcovered,  that  if  an  immoral  Clergy- 
man is  to  be  tried  and  condemned,  there  muft  be 
Courts  for  his  Trial  and  Condemnation.  Where^ 
fays  hep.  78,  is  the  Cafe  to  he  tried?  Can  it  he 
tried  any  where^  conformably  to  the  Mode  of  the  efia- 
hlifhed  Churchy  hut  in  a  Spiritual  Court  ?  We 
are  under  no  peculiar  Attachment  to  the  Mode  of 
Practice  in  the  ecclefiaftical  Courts  at  Home,  nor 
will  American  Bifhops  be  obliged  to  follow  it.  And 
,  as  to  fuch  Courts  as  may  be  ereded  in  this  Coun- 
try, for  the  Trial  of  the  epifcopal  Clergy  only, 
the  Dodlor,  I  again  fay,  need  give  himfelf  no 
Concern  about  them,  unlefs  he  expeds  to  become 
an  epifcopal  Clergyman  himfelf.  For  none  have 
Reafon  to  objedl  againft  Things,  but  upon  the 
Suppofition  that  they  are  to  be,  in  fome  Manner, 
affected  by  them.  The  popular  Objedion  againft 
fpiritual  Courts^  is  altogether  founded  on  the  Opi- 
nion of  their  being  injurious,  not  to  the  Clergy, 
but  to  the  Laity  •,  but  where  fpiritual  Courts  take 
no  Cognizance  at  all  of  the  Anions  of  the  Laity, 
as  it  is  intended  that  they  never  fhall  in  Americay 
this  Objedtion  vanifhes. 

IT  is  ohfervedy  fays  the  Dodor,  that  *  the  Cler- 

*  gy's  being  under  the  Eye  of  their  Bifhop  will 

*  naturally  tend  to  make  them,  in  general,  more 

*  regular  and  diligent  in  the  Difcharge  of  the  Du- 
'  ties  of  their  Office.'  And  what  Objection  can  he 
make  to  this  ?  Why,  //  their  being  under  the  Eye 
of  the  omniprefenty  omnifcient  Gody  will  not  make 
them  regular  and  diligent ^  it  is  a  vain  Thing  to  expect 
that  their  being  under  '  the  Eye  of  the  Biihop* 
fhould  do  it.  And  with  equal  Truth  and  Propri- 
ety he  might  have  faid,  of  all  but  Atheifts,  that 


DEFENDED.  119 

if  their  heing  tinder  the  Eye  of  the  omniprefent,  cm-   Sect, 
mfdent  God^  will  not  reftrain  Men  from  the  Crimes     ^^ 
of  Fraud  and  Injuftice,  it  is  a  vain  Thing  to  expe3 
that  their  heing  tinder  the  Eye  of  the  civil  Magif- 
trate  fhould  do  it.      That  the  perpetual   Prefence 
and  Infpedlion  of  the  Supreme  Being  ought  to  have 
a  greater  EfFed  upon  Men,  than  the  Prefence  of 
any  earthly  Superior,  I  freely  allow  ;  but  that  it 
does  not  adually  produce  this  Effed,  in  innumer- 
able Inflances,  is   a  melancholy  Truth,  and  upon 
one  Moment's  Rccolledlion,  the  Do6lor  muft  con- 
fefs  it.     What  then  is  to  be  done  ?  Muft  Men  be 
left  to  do  "  what  is  right  in  their  own  Eyes,"  becaufe 
they  will  not  confider  themfelves  as  under  the  Eye  of 
the  omniprefent^  omnifcient  God  ?  Ought  Criminals 
to  go  unpunifhed,    becaufe  they  will  not  govern 
themfelves  by  the  great  Motives  of  Religion  ?  Or 
where   thefe  are  incffedtual,    is  it  impoflible  that 
Men  fhould  be  governed  by  Motives  of  a  temporal 
Nature  •,  or  can  it  confift  with  public  Wifdom  and 
the  Safety  of  Society,  that  fuch  Perfons  Ihould  not 
be  reftrained  by  human  Laws  ?  According   to  this 
Scheme  of  Politicks,  it  is  unreafonable  to  exped 
any  Benefit,  either  from  Difcipiine  in  the  Church, 
or  from  Government  in  the  State. 

Farther  Exception  is  taken  at  the  Exprefllon, 
that  the  American  Clergy  will  be  under  the  Eye  of 
their  future  Bifhop,  as  highly  figurative.  But  fi- 
gurative as  it  is,  it  may  be  juftified  by  common 
Ufage.  To  fay  of  a  Clergyman  who  is  even  in 
the  immediate  Prefence  of  his  Bilbop,  that  he  is 
under  his  Eye,  is  a  figurative  Expreflion ;  and  is 
never,  I  believe,  underftood  in  a  ftridt  literal  Senfe. 
To  be  under  the  Eye  of  a  Superior,  in  common 
Language  fignifies,  to  be  within  the  Compafs  of 

his 


I20  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  his  Obfervatioti  and  Notice.  And  this  will,  in  fomc 
^'  Degree,  be  the  Cafe  of  every  American  Clergyman, 
under  the  propofed  Epifcopate.  Allowing  that  a 
Number  of  them  will  \>q.  fixed  inCures^  fome  Fifty  ^  fome 
a  Hundred^  and  fome  two  or  three  Hundred  Miles 
from  the  Place  of  the  Biihop's  Refidence  ;  yet  by 
Means  of  Vifitations,  and  a  free  Correfpondence, 
-nothing  very  material  can  arife  in  a  Clergyman's 
Situation  or  Condud,  without  the  Bifhop's  having 
early  Notice  of  it  : — Very  early,  in  Comparifon 
with  what  it  would  be,  if  he  were  at  the  Diftance 
of  a  Thoufand  Leagues. 

What  follows  upon  the  Subje61:  of  Difcipline, 
is  either  of  no  Confequence,  or  has  been  anfwered 
already  :  I  fhall  therefore  now  attend  upon  the 
Doctor,  in  his  Objedtions  to  what  was  advanced, 
under  the  Head  of  Ordination. 

Among  the  Difadvantages,  to  which  the  Church 
of  England  in  America   is  fubje6t,  for  Want  of 
Ordination,  the  Danger  of  crofling  the  Atlantic^ 
for  the  Purpofe  of  obtaining  Holy  Orders,  was  re-  « 
prefented  as  worthy  of  Attention.  For  an  Illuftra- 1 
tion  of  this  Point,  the  following  Fad  was  related.; 

*  The  exadl  Number  of  thofe  that  have  gone  Home] 

*  for  Ordination,  from  thefe  northern  Colonies,  is 
'  Fifty-two.     Of    thefe  Forty-two  have  returned 

*  fafely,  and  Ten  have  mifcarried  •,  the  Voyage  or 

*  Sicknefs  occafioned  by  it,  having  proved  fatal  to 

*  near  a  fifth  Part  of  them.'  The  Dodlor  replies ; 
/  have  never  heard  of  more  than  Two  to  whom  the 
Sea  proved  fatal.  If  Eight  more  lofi  their  Lives  by 
Sicknefs,  it  is  no  more  than  they  might  have  done  if 
they  had  tarried  at  Home,  p.  8 1 .  If  he  knows  but 
of  Two,  to  whom  the  Sea  proved  fatal,  I  can  tell 

him 


DEFENDED.  izi 

Ihim  of  feveral.  Within  a  Year  of  the  Time  of  'Sect,* 
writing  the  Appeal^  Two  perifhed  in  one  Ship  upon  ^* 
the  Coaft  of  New-Jerfey^  ahnoft  in  Sight  of  their 
Port  ♦,  one  of  whom  left  a  Wife  and  Family  of 
fmall  Children  in  New-Tor k,  without  any  other 
Means  of  Support,  than  the  charitable  AfTiftance 
of  their  Chriiban  Neighbours.  As  to  thofe  that  loft 
their  Lives  by  Sicknefs,  it  is  true,  t^^y  might  have 
died  //  they  had  tarried  at  Home  \  as  thofe  who  pe- 
yifhed  at  Sea  might  have  been  drowned  at  Home  in 
frefh  Water.  But  the  AfTertion  is,  not  that  they 
died  abroad,  but  that  they  died  of  '  Sicknefs  oc- 
*  cafioned  by  the  Voyage,'—-/,  e,  of  Sicknefs,  to 
which,  in  all  Probability,  they  would  not  have 
been  expofcd,  were  it  not  for  the  Voyage.  And 
this  is  ftri6lly  true  of  them  in  every  In  lance.  Per^ 
haps  the  Do6lor  may  not  think  much  of  our  Can- 
didates dying  of  contagious  Diforders,  fmce  fuch 
are  no  more  than  what  are  called  natural  Deaths, 
and  all  muft  die  fooner  or  later.  If  he  can  be  of 
this  Opinion  after  recolle6ling,  that  fuch  Perfons 
have  been  taken  off  in  the  h^rime  of  Life— juft  as 
they  were  entring  into  public  Stations,  in  which 
they  flattered  themfelves  that  they  fhould  be  ufetul 
to  the  World — that  they  died  in  a  foreign  Land,  at 
%  Diftance  from  their  deareft  Friends  and  Connec- 
tions— I  will  not  difpute  it  with  him.  But  what 
does  he  think,  of  our  Candidates  being  carried  into 
Captivity— thrown  into  noifome  Prifons  in  an  Ene- 
my's Country — arid  there  languifhing,  for  many 
Months,  under  the  moft  hideous  Forms  of  Diilrefs 
and  Wretchednefs  ?  Even  this  has  happened  in  fe- 
veral Inilances,  and  may  happen  again. 

BUl!  he  the  Banger  great  er  fmalU  [ays  he^  there 
is  good  Reafon  to  believe^  the  going  to  England  for 

R  Ordi- 


122  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  Ordination  is  rather  an  Advantage^  than  Difadvan- 
^^^*  tage  to  the  Church  in  Regard  to  its  being  fupplied 
with  Minijlers,  If  going  to  England  for  Ordinati- 
on»  notwithftanding  the  Danger  and  Expence  that 
attend  it,  is  an  Advantage  to  the  Church  of  En^ 
gland  in  America  ;  why  would  not  going  thither 
for  Ordination,  be  alfo  an  Advantage  to  all  the 
Churches  of  the  Colonies  ?  And  why  is  not  this  Ad- 
vantage generally  purfued  ?  For  although  their 
Candidates  may  be  ordained  here,  there  is  no  Doubt 
but,  if  they  fhould  be  found  qualified,  they  might 
be  ordained  in  England^  as  well  as  ours.  The 
Do(5lor  declares  that  he  Jhould  efteem  it  a  happy  Cir- 
cumjiance  in  this  Cafe^  was  he  inclined  to  take  Orders ^ 
that  he  muft  go  to  England  for  that  Purpofe.  If  he 
was  always  of  this  Way  of  thinking,  why  did  he 
not  go  to  England  to  receive  fuch  Ordination  as  he 
has  ?  It  is  no  fufficient  Anfwer  to  fay  that  he  could 
be  ordained  here  ;  for  if  he  was  at  Liberty  to  go 
to  England^  and  if  his  going  was  confidered  by 
him  as  a  Thing  defirable  on  the  whole,  it  was  ab- 
furd  in  him  not  to  go.  Nay,  if  he  is  of  fuch  a  cu- 
rious or  adventurous  Turn,  why  does  he  not  gra- 
tify it  by  a  Voyage  now,  although  he  is  not  inclined 
to  take  Orders  ?  For,  as  I  underftand  him,  he  fpeaks 
in  the  prefent  Tenfe.  If  a  Man  dcfires  to  go  to 
England  for  a  Thing  which  he  might  as  well  ob- 
tain without  going  *,  he  muft  be  equally  defirous 
of  going  thither,  if  that  Thing  were  intirely  out 
of  the  Queftion. 

But  all  Men  have  not  the  fame  DifpoGtion  with 
the  Dodtor ;  and  if  many^  to  whom  he  has  menti- 
oned the  Matter,  have  declared  themf elves  to  be  of 
the  fame  Mind^  there  are  certainly  many  others,  I 
imagine  a  great  Majority,  who  have  different  Sen- 

timents. 


DEFENDED.  123 

tlments.  When  Dr.  Cutler^  Dr.  Johnfon  and  Mr.  Sect. 
Browne^  declared  their  Conformity  to  the  Church,  ^^* 
and  went  Home  from  Conne^iiciit  for  Ordination  ;. 
it  is  well  known,  that  an  Apprehenfion  of  the 
Dangers  of  the  Voyage,  was  what  prevented  fe- 
veral  other  DifTenting  Minifters  of  that  Colony, 
whofe  Names  I  could  mention,  all  Men  of  the 
like  excellent  Character  with  thofe  Gentlemen,  from 
declaring  alfo  their  Conformity,  and  going  with 
them.  This  is  a  Fa6t  which  Dr.  Chauncy  muft  be 
fuppofed  to  have  heard  of,  and  he  can  hardly  have 
forgoten  it.  There  have  been  frequent  Inftances 
of  the  like  Nature,  of  which  probably  he  has  not 
heard.  Now  with  Regard  to  all  fuch  Perfons,  it 
is  a  great  Hardihip  upon  them,  that  they  cannot 
obtain  what  they  are  defirous  of  having  *,  as  it  is  a 
Hardihip  upon  the  Church,  to  be  precluded  from 
the  Benefit  of  their  Services,  while  they  are  fo 
greatly  wanted. 

Against  the  Complaint  of  the  Expenftvenefs  of 
a  Voyage  to  England  for  Ordination,  the  Dodor 
advances  an  Objedlion,  which  carries  with  it  the 
moft  tremendous  Appearance.  As  this  Matter  be- 
tween him  and  me  has  afforded  fome  Speculation 
to  the  Curious,  I  will  ftate  and  explain  it  with  par- 
ticular Care. 

It  was  faid  in  the  Appeal^  p.  34,  that  *  theEx- 
'  pence  of  this  Voyage  cannoi  be  reckoned  at  lefs, 

*  upon  an  Average,  than  a  hundred  Pounds  Sterling, 
'  to  each  Peribn' — and  that  it  '  muft  generally 

*  fall  upon  fuch,  as  having  already  expended  the 

*  greateft  Part  of  their  Pittance  in  their  Education, 

*  will  find  it  extremely  hard  t;o  raife  a  Sum  fuffici- 
'  ent  for  the  Purpofe.'    In  Anfwer  to  this,    the 

R  2  Dodor 


1*4  T  IT  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 


Sect, 
III. 


Doa:or  very  candidly  fuppofes  I  had  never  feen^  cr^ 
if  I  had^  did  not  remember  at  the  I'ime  of  writings 
the  Account  of    the  Society  fuhlifjed  in    1706,    in 
which  they  fay,  '^  all  young  Students  in  thofe  Parts 
"  (the  Colonies)  who  defire  epifcopal  Ordination, 
"  are  invited  into  Engknd -,  and  their  Expences 
"  in  coming  and  returning  are  to  be  defrayed  by 
*'  the  Society,"  p.  82.  Again,  he  repeats  this  Ob- 
jedion  in  p.  90  ;  the  Society,  fays  he,  has  publickly   . 
tnvtted  into  Engknd  all  young  Students  in  thefe  Parts, 
who  defire  holy  Orders  ^,  declaring  that  their  Ex- 
pence    IN    COMING  AND  RETURNING    IS    TO    BE    DE- 
PRAVED BY  THE  Society,     ^his  is  the  Fa^  truly 
ftated.  The  Complaint  made  in  the  Appeal  is,  that 
the   Voyage   is   expeniive  •,     the   Anfwer   by  Dr. 
€hauncy  is  manifeftly  contrived  to  excite  the  Idea, 
that  it  is  not  expenfive.     The  Complaint  fays,  the 
Expcnce  upon   an  Average,  is  a  hundred  Pounds 
Sterling,    to  each  Perlbn ;  the  Anfwer  leads  the 
Reader  to  believe,  that  it  is  not  a  Farthing.     But    | 
this  is  not  the  worft  of  it ;  the  Anfwer  appears  to    •' 
me  to  be  artfully  calculated  to  lead  the  Reader  alfo 
to  believe  Something  farther— namely,  that  con- 
cerning a  plain  Matter  of  Fa6l,  with  Regard  to 
which  It  IS  impofTiblc  that  any  Miffionary  cart  be 
miftaken,  I  have  publifhed  to  the  World  an  abfo- 
lute,  wilful  Falfhood  j  a  Fallhood,  which  I  knew 
might  be  eafily  deteded  by  any  of  our  Adverfaries ; 
a  Fallhood,  which  was  known  to  be  fuch,  not  only 
by  every  Miffionary  on  the  Continent,  but  by  every 
Member  of  the  Society  both  here  and  at  Home 
and  by  every  Bifhop  in  the  Kingdom.    So  that  I 
fear  the  Dodor  really  intended  to  lead  his  Readers 
to  believe  me  to  have  been  in  this  Matter,  both  a 
notorious  Liar,    and  abominably  ftupid.      I  have 
freely  mentioned  what  I  ftrongly  fufpeft,  and  what 

I  know 


DEFENDED.  125 

I  know  to  be  fnfpedled  by  many  others.    If  he  can  Sect. 
exculpate  himieit,  f  think  it  greatly  concerns  him     III* 
to  do  it :  Or  if  any  of  his  Friends  can  clear  him, 
it  is  in  their  Power  to  do  him  a  moft  material  Ser- 
vice*.   Nothing  lefs,  in  my  Opinion,  can  excufe 
him  to  the  World  and  to  his  own  Confcience,  than 
proper  Evidence  that  he  himfelf  believes,  and  has 
Reafon   for   believing,  that  I   have  actually  been 
guilty  of  fuch  bafe   and  abfurd  Condudt,    as  his 
Infmuations  manilefly  imply.    But  that  he  believes 
any  fuch  Thing  himfelf,  he  does  not  fay  :  He  only 
fays,  that  the  Socitty  has,  meaning  upwards  of  60 
Years  ago,  publickly  invited  over  young  Students, 
promifing  to  del  ray  their  Expences.     This,  not- 
withftanding  its  Appearance,  is  not  in  Reality  any 
Contradiction  to   my  Affertion,    which  evidently 
related  to  the   prefent  State  of  the  Church,  and 
not   to  the   State  of  it  in  the  Beginning   of  this 
Century. 

That  the  Society  publiflied  fuch  an  Invitation 
in  1 706,  I  believe  to  be  true ;  but  it  appears  that 
the  Invitation  was  only  occafional,  apd  that  none 
complied  with  it.  It  was  not  until  feveral  Years  af- 
terwards, that  the  firft  Candidates  from  this  Coun- 
try went  Home  for  holy  Orders,    before  v/hich 

Time 

*  The  Author  of  &  /^litions  Letter  from  a  Memher  of  the 
Societyy  which  has  been  pubiilhed  in  one  of  the  Ne^-w-Tcrk 
Papers,  has  endeavoured  to  vindicate  Dr.  Chauncy  from  the 
Charges  of  Falfhcod  and  Infincerity,  which  had  been  brought 
againil  him  on  Account  of  his  Conduct  in  this  Affair.  But 
vnlcfs  he  fhould  have  the  good  Luck  to  meet  with  an  abler 
and  fairer  Advocate,  his  Reputation  muft  fufFer,  wherever 
ihe  Cafe  fhall  be  known.  The  Doftor  has  received  and  pub- 
iilhed the  formal  Thanks  of  his  Brethren,  for  his  Jnfnver  to 
the  Appeal ;  it  is  hoped  that  they  had  no  particular  Reference 
to  this  Part  of  his  Performance,  when  they  paid  him  the 
Compliment. 


in. 


126  THEAPPEAL 

Se^ct.  Time  the  Invitation  was  recalled,  or  rather  had  ex- 
pired ;  and  neither  they,  nor  any  of  their  Succef- 
fors,  fo  far  as  I  can  learn,  received  Benefit  from  it. 
If  the  Dodor  knew  this,  he  muft  have  known  that 
this  antiquated  Invitation  of  the  Society,  which 
never  took  EfFed,  was  no  more  an  Anfwer  to  the 
Complaint  againft  which  he  alledged  it,  than  if  he 
had  quoted  one  of  the  ancient  Englifh  Statutes  a- 
gainft  the  Lollards.  If  he  knew  it  not,  he  ought 
to  have  fufpeded  his  own  Ignorance,  and  to  have 
inquired  into  the  Matter,  when  he  found  that  it  was 
fo  publickly  and  boldly  alTerted. 

^  In  a  Word  ;  the  "truth  of  Fa5i  is,  that  the  So- 
ciety  are  under  no  Engagements  to  defray  the  Ex^ 
peaces  of  Candidates  in  going  home  for  Ordina- 
tion, and  do  not  defray  them,  and,  I  believe,  ne- 
ver have,  fo  much  as  in  one  Inftance,  defrayed 
them,  either  wholly  or  in  Part.  In  a  few  Cafes  they 
have  made  Donations  to  Candidates,  in  Confidera- 
tion  of  fome  extraordinary  LofTes  or  DiftrefTes  fuffer- 
cd  in  their  Voyage,  but  never  more  that  I  know  of, 
than  a  Compenfation  for  fuch  extraordinary  LofTes  ; 
and  they  make  it  a  Rule  to  advance  half  a  Year's 
Salary  to  their  MifTionaries,  before  their  Embark- 
ation for  America^  to  enable  them  the  better  to  de- 
fray their  own  Expences.  As  this  Matter  is  far- 
ther explained  in  a  late  well-received  Pamphlet, 
written  in  Vindication  of  a  Sermon  of  the  Lord 
Bifhop  of  Landaff,  I  need  not  enlarge  upon  it. 

The  next  Thing  the  Doctor  controverts  with 
me,  is  the  following  Obfervation.     *  Other  Rea- 

*  fons  may  have  contributed  to  this  general  Want 

*  of  Clergymen  in  America^  but  it  has  always  been 
'  principally  owing  to  the  great  Difficulty  of  ob- 

'  taining 


DEFENDED.  127 

^  raining  Ordination.'  This  Opinion  might  be  a-  Sfct. 
bundantly  fupported  both  by  Authorities  and  Ar-  ^^* 
guments ;  but  it  is  fufficient  to  confider  wliat  is 
objeded  againft  it.  The  Do6lor,  after  teili  g  us 
that  the  New-England  Miflions  are  generally  filled, 
afks,upon  my  View  of  the  QdS^^why  Jhould  the  Diff'- 
cttUy  be  fo  great  in  other  Provinces^  and  none  at  all 
in  the  New-England  ones^  or  fo  incofifiderabley  as  to 
be  eafily  got  over  ?  If  it  was  in  itjelf  a  real  aiid 
great  Difficulty^  its  Operation  would  be  aspo  i  rful  in  - 
the fe  Colonies  as  the  other ^  P-  ^3-  ^  never  before 
heard,  that  the  Difficujty  of  fupplying  the  New- 
England  Millions  with  Clergymen,  is  none  at  all, 
cr  fo  inconfiderahle  as  to  he  easily  got  over,  I  be- 
lieve the  MifTionaries  themfelves,  and  the  People 
of  their  refpedlive  MilTions,  will  agree  in  telling  a 
very  different  Story.  I  will  point  out  to  the  Doc- 
tor one  Cafe,  which  of  itfelf  is  more  than  fuffici- 
ent to  confute  all  that  he  has  faid,  or  can  fay,  a- 
bout  the  Eaftnefs  of  fupplying  the  New-England 
^  MifTions.  The  Members  of  the  Church  of  En- 
P  gland  at  Hebron^  in  ConneSiicuty  exerted  themfelves 
for  near  twenty  Years,  and  were  at  great  Expence 
in  fending  home  four  Candidates  fuccelTively,  be- 
fore they  had  the  Satisfadlion  of  enjoying  a  refident 
Miflionary,  They  firft  fent  home  Mr.  Dean,  in 
1 745,  who  was  admitted  to  Holy  Orders,  and  ap- 
pointed by  the  Society  their  MifTionary  for  Hebron  ; 
but  in  returning  to  his  MifTion,  and  to  a  Wife  and 
feveral  fmall  Children  who  depended  upon  him 
for  their  daily  Support,  he  is  fuppofed  to  have  pe- 
rifhed  at  Sea,  neither  the  Ship  nor  any  Pcrfon  on 
board  having  been  ever  heard  of.  The  next,  was 
Mr.  ColtoH'y  who  in  1752,  died  on  his  PafTagc 
from  London  to  New-England,  and  was  buried  in 
the  Ocean.    The  third  Candidate  feot  Home  by 

this 


128  TH  E    A  PPE  A  L 

Sect,    this  unfortunate  People,  was  Mr.  Vfiier ;  who,  in 
his  V^^Y  to  England,  in   1757,  was  taken  by  th^ 
French,  thrown  into  Prifon,  and  at  laft  died  in  the 
Caflle  oi  Bayonne,     The  fourth  was  Mr.P^/^rj; 
who  in   1759,    not  long  after  his  Arrival  in  eZ 
gland,  was  taken  with  the  Small-Pox,  from  which 
he  had  the  good  Fortune  to  recover— and  at  length, 
to  the  great  Joy  of  the  People,  he  arrived  at  He- 
hron,  where  he  is  at  prefent  the  Society's  worthy 
Miffionary  f .     If  any  Prelbyterian  or  congregati- 
onal  Society  in  the  Colonies   had  fulfered  in  this 
Manner ;  much  more,    if  all  of  them  were  ren- 
dered liable  to  fufFer  in  this  Manner,  through  the 
Want  of  fuch  a  full  Toleration  as  was  allowed  to 
all  other  religious  Denominations  ;  I  am  much  mif- 
taken,  if  the  whole  Britijh  Dominions  would  not 
refound  with,    at  leaft.  Lamentations   and   Com- 
plaints.     And  if  the  LegiQature  Ihould  not  fpeedi- 
ly  interpofe  for  the  Relief  of  fuch  Sufferers,  thefc 
very  Writers,  who  can  confider  the  Matter  as  a 
meer  Trifle  in  the  Cafe  of  the  Church,  would,  if 
I  know  any  Thing  of  their  Genius  and  Difpofition, 
be  found  to  make  endlefs  Outcries  of  Injuftice  and 
Cruelty.     But  fuch  is  the  Blindnefs  of  fome  con- 
troverfial  Bigots,  that  on  one  Side  they  miflakc 
Mountains  for  Mole-Hills,  and  on  the  other  Side, 
Mole-Hills  for  Mountains  ! 

After  all,  fhould  I  allow  that,  according  to 
the  Dodor's  Reprefentation,  there  is  no  Difficulty, 
or  rather  that  notwithftanding  the  Difficulty,  the 
New-England  Miffions  are  commonly  fupplied ;  it 
will  by  no  Means  follow,  that  Difficulties  which 
are  furmounted  by  the  People  of  New-England^ 

would 

t  Sec  the  Ahjira^  for  1759. 


DEFENDED.  129 

would  not  intimidate  and   deter   others,    in  the  Sect. 
fouthern  Colonies.  ^* 

The  Doctor,  not  liking  the  Reafon  afiigned  in 
the  Appeal,  for  the  great  Want  of  American  Cler- 
gymen, proceeds  to  aflign  Reafons  of  his  own.  One 
is,  that  the  Society  negledt  the  fouthern  Colonics, 
that  they  may  be  more  able  to  epifcopize  thofe  of 
New-England.     But   this  is   Hale    common-place 
Abufe,  and  the  Charge  has  been  confuted  over 
and  over.  It  has  been  moft  thoroughly  confuted  in 
a  very  full  and  compleat  Anfwer  to  Dr.  May  hew"  % 
*'  Obfervations  on  the  Charter  and  Conduct  of  the 
*'  Society."   A  Sentence  indeed  is  quoted  from  the 
Bifhop  of  Landaff's  Sermon,  to  prove  that  this  is 
the  grand  Objedt  of  the  Society  ;  but  the  Applica- 
tion of  it  to  that  Purpofe  is  a  manifeft  Perverfion, 
The  Bilhop  fays  :  ''  This  Point  (the  propofed  E- 
pifcopate)  obtained,  the  American  Church  will 
go  out  of  its  infant  State  ;  be  able  to  ftand  upon 
its  own  Legs;    and  without   foreign   Help  to 
fupport  and  fpread  itfelf.     Then  the  Bufmefs 
of  this  Society  will  have  been  brought  to  the 
happy  IfTue  intended."     This  laft  Sentence  is 
what  the  Dod:or  alledges,  as  a  Proof  of  the  Society's 
Intentions.     But  let  any  impartial  Perfon  view  its 
Connexion  with  what  preceded,  and  he  will  find 
it  impoffible  not  to  fee,  that  the  Bifhop  fays  no  fuch 
Thing  as  he  is  made  to  fay.     His  Lordfhip  men- 
tions a  Time,  wherein  "  the  Bufinefs  of  the  Soci- 
**  ety  will  be  brought  to  the  happy  Ifllie  intended  ;'* 
h\jx.when  does  he  fay  this  Time  will  be  ?  No  other 
Anfwer  can  fairly  be  given  to  the  Queftion  than 
this:    He  fays  "the  Bufinefs  of  the  Society  will 
"  have  been  brought  to  the  happy  Ifllie  intended," 
when  "the  American  Church"  fhall  "  be  able  to 

S  "  ftand 


I30  THE    APPEAL 

Sect*  «  {land  upon  its  own  Legs,  and  without  foreign 
^*  "  Help  to  fupport  and  fpread  itfelf."  But  how 
does  Dr.  Chauncy  anfwer  the  above  Queftion  ?  Let 
us  take  it  in  his  own  Words  :  The  View  indeed  cf 
the  Society^  fays  he,  has  been  to  epifcopize  thefe  Colo- 
nies^ and  this  they  have  made  their  great  Bujinefs  : 
Infomuch  that  Jhould  it  he  accomplijhed^  "  it  will 
"  THEN  have  been  brought  to  the  happy  IfTue  in- 
'*  tended,"  as  we  are  told^  in  plain  PFords,  hy  the 
Bijhop  of  Landaff,  Does  then  the  Bilhop  of  Lan- 
daffttW  us  in  plain  JVords^  that  "  the  happy  IfTue 
"intended"  by  the  Society  is,  according  to  the  quaint 
Phrafeology  lately  introduced,  the  Epifcopization 
of  the  New-England  Colonies  ?  Does  he  fay  any 
Thing  that  implies  it  ?  Cannot  the  Church  of  En- 
gland in  America  Hand  upon  its  own  Legs  and  fup- 
port itfelf,  until  the  Prefbyterians  and  Congregati- 
onalifts  of  New-England  fhall  be  made  Profelytes 
to  it  ?  Do  not  the  congregational  Churches  at  this 
Day  ftand  upon  their  own  Legs  and  fupport  them- 
felves  in  the  Colonies  without  unepifcopizing  the 
Members  of  the  Church  ?  In  Order  therefore  to 
maintain  his  Charge  againfl  the  Bifliop  of  Landaff^ 
even  after  an  Abatement  of  what  is  faid  about 
plain  IVords^  will  not  the  Do6lor  be  obliged  to 
have  Recourfe  to  Lord  Peter's  Invention,  of  mak- 
ing it  out  totidem  LiteriSy  fmce  he  muft  fail  in  the 
Method  of  attempting  it  totidem  Verbis^  and  even 
totidem  Syllabis  ?  But  enough  of  this. 

Another  Rcafon  given  by  the  Do61:or  for  the 
Want  of  American  Clergymen,  is  the  Backward- 
nefs  of  the  Church  People  to  educate  their  Sons 
for  this  Service.  But  if  their  Backwardnefs  is  much 
owing  to  the  great  Difficulty  of  obtaining  Ordinati- 
OHj  as  I  am  perfuaded  it  is,  although  the  Dodor 

fuppof«.§ 


DEFENDED.  131 

fuppofcs  otherwife,    it  contradi6ls  not,   but  coin-  ^^^^* 
cides   with,    the   general   Reafon   afligned  in  the 
Apfeal, 

His  laft  Reafon  is,  the  Infufficiency  of  the  T'emp- 
tatioHy  in  moft  Cafes,  to  influence  Candidates  of  other 
Denominations  to  conform  to  the  Church,  ^ey 
have,  fays  the  Do<5lor,  a  better  Profpe5f  in  continu- 
ing with  us,  than  they  would  have  ffoould.  they  change 
Sides,  and  become  Epifcopalians.  This,  1  beheve, 
is,  and  hitherto  has  been,  the  Cafe  -,  and  now  that 
it  is  confefled  on  the  Part  of  our  Adverfaries,  I 
hope  we  fhall  no  longer  be  reproached  with  con- 
forming to  the  Church  from  mercenary  Motives. 
Thofe  Candidates  who  have  given  up  the  better 
Profpe^i  in  continuing  with  them,  ctxidiwXy  ought 
not  to  be  confidered  as  Men  of  no  Confciences, 
however  miftaken  they  may  be  thought  to  have 
been  with  Regard  to  their  Principles.  Many  fuch 
we  have  already  had  5  others  are  coming  over  to  us 
daily;  and  had  we  Biihops  in  this  Country,  I 
fhould  not  doubt  of  a  full  Supply  for  all  the 
Churches  in  Amrica, 

It  was  obfervcd  in  the  Appeal,  p.  36,  that  a 
very  '  glaring  Difadvantage,  to  which  the  Church 
'  in  America  is  manifeftly  fubjedl,  arifes  from  the 
'  Impoflibility  that  a  Bilhop  redding  in  England^ 
'  Ihould  be  fufiiciently  acquainted  with  the  Cha- 
'  radlers  of  thofe  who  go   home  from  this  Country 

*  for  Holy  Orders.    To  this  it  is  owing,  that  Or- 

*  dination  has  been  fometimes  fraudulently  and  fur- 

*  reptitioufly  obtained  by  fuch  Wretches,  as  arq 

*  not  only  a  Scandal  to  the  Church,  but  a  Dif-^ 

*  grace  to  human  Nature.'    Upon  this,  and  more 
to  the  fame  Purpofe  faid  of  fuch  Perfons,  the  Doc- 

S  2  tor^ 


132  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  tor,  with  his  ufual  Sagacity,  obferves,  in  p.  S^: 
Had  fuch  a  Charge  been  publickly  exhibited  againjl 
the  Society^ s  Miffionaries^  by  thofe  of  the  Prejhyteri- 
an  or  Congregational  Perfuajion^  it  would  have  been 
difregarded  at  home^  and  ejleemed  by  Epifcopalians 
here  a  fure  Jrgument  of  inveterate  Enmity  againfi 
the  Church.  The  Dodor  is  right  here  ;  it  would 
undoubtedly,  and  very  juftly,  be  fo  difregarded  and 
^  cfteemed.  But  will  he  venture  to  affirm,  or  does 
he  mean  to  infmuate,  that  I  had  exhibited  fuch  a 
Charge  againfi  the  Society's  Mijfionaries^  or  againll 
the  Body  of  the  American  Clergy  ?  Did  I  fo  much  as 
mention  the  Miffionaries  ?  In  Ihort,  did  I  utter  a  finr 
gle  Word  that  implies,  or  carries  the  leaft  Intimation, 
that  I  entertained  an  unfavourable  Opinion  of  the 
American  Clergy  ?  On  the  other  Hand,  did  I  not 
declare  my  Belief  to  be,  that  their  '  general  Cha- 

*  rader  is  truly  refpecSlable' — that  '  they  are  found 

*  and  fteady  in  their  Principles,  and  regular  in  their 

*  Behaviovir  ?*  But  what  I  faid  was,  that  Ordinati- 
on had  been  sometimes,  or,  as  it  was  expreiTed  in 
another  Place,  in  some  Instances,  fraudulently 
obtained  by  Wretches,  who,  in  my  Opinion,  anf- 
wered  the  Defcription  there  given  of  them.  When 
this  was  faid,  it  was  with  Reference  chiefly  to  Per- 
fons  that  never  were  admitted  into  the  Society's 
Service.  Indeed  there  was  one  Inftance  among  the 
Miffionaries  that  could  not  be  overlooked  ♦,  an  In- 
ilance,  which  was  the  Subject  of  common  Con- 
verfation  at  the  Time  of  my  writing,  of  a  Perfon 
then  lately  ordained  and  appointed  to  a  Miffion  in 
NeW'Jerfey-'-{2i\d  to  have  been  ordained  upon  Tef- 
limonials  from  this  Country,  which  Teftimonials  it 
was  commonly  thought  muft  have  been  forged^  as 
his  Charadler  here  was  fo  notorioufly  infamous. 
But  before  this  Perfon  embarked  for  his  Miffion, 

his 


DEFENDED.  133 

his  true  Chara6ter  was  difcovered,  and  the  Society  SEcr. 
immediately  difcarded  him.    Now  of  fuch  Clergy-     ^^ 
men  as  thefe,  who  fometimes  creep  into  the  Church, 
thofe  of  the  Pre/by  terian  or  Congregational  Perfuajiony 
may  fpeak  as  reproachfully  as  they  pleafe,  and  no 
Epifcopalians^  either  here  or  at  home,  will  efteem  it 
an  Argument  of  inveterate  Enmity   to   the  Church, 
We  think  no  Defcription  too  bad  for  fuch  Wretch- 
es ;    we  never  fpare   them  ourfelves ;   we   blame 
not  the  DifTenters  for  any  Severity  of  Language  to- 
wards them.     But  what  we   blame  them  for,  is, 
their  indifcriminate  Inve6i:ives  againft  the   Epifco- 
pal  Clergy  in  general— againft  the  whole  Body  of  the 
MifTionaries — and,  which  has  been  very  frequent 
of  late,  againft  all  thofe  that  have  met  together  in 
voluntary  Convention.  The  Dodtor  ha^  not  run  the 
Length  of  fome  others  ;  but   I  could  mention  cer- 
tain periodical  Writers,  who  have  fignalized  them- 
felves  by   the  moft  undiftinguifhing  and  illiberal 
Abufe  of  the  Clergy,  of  the  Biftiops,  and  indeed 
of  every  Thing  that  relates  to  the  Church  ;  and  if 
fomeof  their  Accounts  might  betaken,  the  Con- 
clufion  would  naturally  be  made,  that  there  is  not 
a  Clergyman  in  the  Colonies  who  is  of  a  tolerable 
CharaSer,  any  more  than  a  Bifhop  in  the  Kingdom 
Who  is  not  a  fpiritual  Tyrant,  a  lordly  OppreiTor,  a 
Friend  of  Perfecution,  &e.  &c.  &c. 

As  to  the  Mattet*  of  Teftimdnials,  the  Do6lor 
fuppofes  the  Cafe  would  be  the  fame  was  there  A  Bi^ 
fhop  in  America^  as  it  is  at  prefent ;  lince  he  could 
not  be  particularly  acquainted  with  the  Characters 
of  the  Candidates.  One  Biftiop  only  is  not  thought 
fufficient  for  all  the  Colonies  in  America  ;  but  had  ■* 
we  Biftiops,  they  might  be  perfonally  acquainted, 
if  iiot  with  all  the  Candidates,  yet  with  all  thofe 

from 


134  THEAPPEAL 

Sect."  from  whom   Teflimonials  muft  come ;  'and  fuch 

ITT 

"  an  Acquaintance  would  enable  them  to  make  ne- 
ceflary  Diflindtions,  and  to  give  to  each  Recom- 
mendation the  Weight  refpedively  due  to  it.  One 
Clergyman's  Recommendation  is  equal  to  another's, 
if  they  are  both  confidered  only  as  Clergymen ;  but 
if  they  are  confidered  under  their  diftinguifhing 
Charaders,  the  one  being  perhaps  a  Perfon  of  un- 
common Penetration  and  inflexible  Integrity,  the 
other  but  of  an  ordinary  Capacity,  and  eafily  bi- 
afled  and  deceived,  their  different  Teilimonies  will 
have  a  very  unequal  Force,  with  the  Bifhop  who 
knows  them.  But  as  what  might  properly  be  faid 
here,  has  been  anticipated  already  ;  I  beg  Leave 
to  refer  the  Reader  to  it,  rather  than  to  repeat  it. 
Upon  the  Whole,  had  we  Bifhops  in  this  Country, 
I  am  firmly  perfuaded,  that  with  proper  Care,  and 
due  Regulations,  it  would  be  next  to  impolTible 
for  a  Man  of  an  exceptionable  Charafter  to  obtain 
Ordination.  One  general  Regulation,  if  I  might 
take  the  Liberty,  I  would  humbly  propofe,  viz. 
That,  when  the  propofed  Epifcopate  ihall  be  fettled, 
the  Plan  marked  out  in  the  Dire6tions  of  Archbi- 
fhop  Wake  to  the  Bifhops  of  his  Province  in  17 1 6, 
fo  far  as  it  relates  to  the  Subjedl  of  Teflimonials, 
with  a  few  Alterations,  fhould  be  an  eilablifhed 
Rule  for  the  American  Bifhops  *. 

I'T  is  certain^  fays  the  Do6tor,  in  p.  ^j^  many 
notorioujly  wicked  Perfons  in  England^  z'oftly  more  in 
Proportion  than  in  America^  have  found  JVays — to  get 
into  Orders  ;  and  he  endeavours  in  many  Places  to 
eftablifh  a  Belief,  that  the  Clergy  at  home,  under 
the  immediate  Government  of  Bifhops,  are  worfe, 

than 

*  See  the  Dire^lions  at  large   in  Burn's  Ecclefiajiical  Law, 
Title  Ordination. 


DEFENDED.  135 

than    they    are    here     without    an     Epifcopate.   Sect. 
And  he  leaves  his  Readers  to  draw  for  themfelves 
this  natural  Inference,  that  American  Biiliops  will 
be  more  likely  to  corrupt,  than  to  reform  the  Cler- 
gy. But  what  he  calls  certain^  is  a  Matter  concern- 
ing which  others  may  poflibly  think  that  he  cannot 
ohx.2\n  Certainty.    But  allowing  it  to  be  true,  that 
there  are  in  Proportion  more  immoral   Clergymen 
there  than  in  America  •,  unlefs  he  can  make   it  ap- 
pear, that  more  Perfons,    in  Proportion,  of  bad 
Chara6ters  at  the  "Time  of  their  Ordination^  are  ad- 
niited  from  a  common  Diocefs  in  England,  than 
from  America,  the  Obfervation  will  not  anfwer  his 
Purpofe.     The  Point  under  Confideration,   is  the 
Cafe  of  bad   Men's  obtaining  Teflimonials,  and 
impofmg  upon  the  Bifhop  •,   but  if  a  Man,  of  a  fair 
Reputation,   at  the  Time  of  his   being  ordained, 
afterwards  relapfes  and  becomes  Profligate,  he    is 
not  within  the  Compafs  of  the  prefent  Argument. 
But  fhould  we  grant  all    that  the  Do6tor  contends 
for  •,   it  has  beea  already  fhewn,   that   the  Cafe  of 
the  Church  here,  under  an  Epifcopate,  will  be  fo 
very  different  from  what  it  is  m  England,  with  Re- 
fped  to  the  Bifiiop*s  Superintendency,  that  the  In- 
ference intended  will  not  follow. 

Dr.  Chauncy  clofes  his  third  SeAion  with  this 
Obfervation  :  Should  the  whole  of  what  the  Br. 
has  offered  be  allowed  its  full  Force^  (which,  by  the 
"Way,  is  an  Acknowledgment  that  hitherto  he  had 
not  allowed  its  full  Force  to  what  I  had  offered) 
without  the  leafi  Abatement^  (and  why  fhould  there 
be  any  Abatement  of  the  real  Force  of  my  Argu- 
ment or  Obfervation  ?)  T^here  is  no  other  HardfJoip^ 
or  Difficulty^  in  the  Cafe^  than  what  naturally  re- 
fults  fretn  profefj'ed  Principles^  and  mujl  unavoidably 

follow 


136  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  follow  upon  theniy  unlefs  an  Eftablijhmeut  is  pur- 
^  pofely  made  in  their  Favor ^  p.  88.  I  am  not  clear 
that  I  iinderftand  the  Meaning  of  this  Sentence. 
Wha,t  an  Eftablifhment  has  to  do  with  the  Subjedt 
in  Debate,  I  know  not.  This  has  never  been  re- 
quefted — It  is  no  Part  of  our  Plan — nor  is  it  ne- 
ceffary  to  the  Execution  of  it  •,  Ordination  by  a 
Bifhop  no  more  fuppofmg,  or  implying,  or  depen- 
ding upqn,  or  being  connected  with,  a  civil  Efta- 
blifhrrient,  th^n  the  Adminiftration  of  Baptifm  by 
a  Preibyter.  As  to  the  other  Part  of  the  Sentence, 
there  is  fomething  in  it  that  looks  extremely  ill- 
favoured.  There  is  no  other  Hardjhif^  or  Difficulty y 
intheCa/ey  than  what  naturally  arifes  from  profeffed 
Principles!  This  looks  as  if,  in  the  Do<ftor*s  Opi- 
nion, Men  were  not  to  be  pitied,  when  their  Suf- 
ferings refult  from  their  Principles.  The  moft 
dreadful  Perfecutions  are  no  more  than  Sufferings 
inflided  upon  Men  for,  and  confequently,  in  fome 
Senfe  refulting  from,  their  profeffed  Principles,  But 
does  the  Dodtor  mean  that  we  fhould  be  left  to 
fuffer,  becaufe  it  is  on  Account  of  our  Principles  ? 
Or  that  Men,  of  whofe  Principles  he  docs  not  ap- 
prove, ought  to  be  perfecuted  ?  From  arguing 
upon  the  Matter  a  prioriy  I  cannot  believe  that  he 
means  this  ;  from  arguing  apofterioriy  I  know  not 
what  to  believe. 


3K)Q()SC 


SECT. 


DEFENDED.  137 

SECTION     IV. 

THE  Defign  of  the  fourth  Sedlion  of  the  Jp-  Sect. 
peal,  was  to  fhew  the  unparalleled  Hardlhip  IV. 
of  the  prefent  Cafe  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the 
American  Colonies.  That  for  Want  of  an  Epif- 
copate,  the  American  Church  of  England  is  really 
inafuffering  State,  the  Members  of  it  feel,  in  in- 
numerable Inflances  ;  and  by  this  Time  it  muft  be 
fo  evident  to  others,  that  a  formal  Proof  of  it  is 
needlefs.  That  the  particularSpecics  orMode  of  this 
Suffering  is  unparalleled^  is  as  evident  as  that  we 
fuffer  at  all.  It  is  in  this  Refpedt,  and  not  on  Ac- 
count of  the  Degree  of  Suffering,  that  the  Word 
unparalleled  was  ufed.  This  was  fufficiently  ex- 
plained in  the  Appeal  by  the  Vv^ord  unprecedented^ 
and  it  is  inconceivable  that  any  can  miltake  it,  un- 
lefs  they  millake  wilfully. 

Against  what  was  faid  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land's being  in  a  mofl  wretched  and  deplorabTe 
Condition  in  the  Colonies,  Dr.  Chauncy  objeds  : 
//  may^  on  the  contrary^  he  affiryned^  as  a  mofi  iinquef- 
tionable  Truths  that  the  Epifcopal  Churches  in  moft  of 
the  Colonies^  are  favored  and  difiinguifhed  far  beyond 
any  other  Churches  of  whatever  Denomination  on  the 
Continent^  P-  92.  The  Reafon  which  fupports  this 
AfTertion  immediately  follows:  Thty  are  preferved  in 
being  by  a  vafily  ex tenfive Charity.  By  the  Way,it  is  no 
Evidence  that  a  Church  is  not  in  a  deplorable  Con- 
dition, that  it  owes  the  Prefervation  of  its  very  Be- 


138  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  ing,  to  Charity.  The  Charity  here  meant,  is  that 
^^*  of  the  Venerable  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gcfpek  oi^  the  Greatnefs  of  which,  we  are  as  fen- 
fible  as  the  Docftor.  The  Charity  of  this  Society 
is  as  unprecedented  in  Degree,  as  the  Sufferings  of 
the  American  Church  are  in  Kind  %  and  when- 
ever we  confider  it,  it  prevents,  in  a  great  Mea- 
fure  our  fighing  out  Groans  (or  groaning  out  Sighs), 
as  it  prefents  to  us  chundant  Reafon  for  the  moft 
grateful  Acknoivkdgments.  But  notwithllanding  the 
Care  the  Society  has  taken  to  provide  proper  Cler- 
gymen for  deftitute  Congregations,  and  the  Expen- 
ces  it  has  been  at  in  fupporting  them  ^  without  an 
Epifcopate,  the  Church  wants  an  elfential  Part  of 
her  Conftitution,  fome  of  her  moft  important  Of- 
fices cannot  be  performed  at  all,  and  her  common 
ones  are  frequently  not  performed  fo  well,  as  might 
be  expeded  under  the  Superintendency  of  refident 
Bifliops.  This,  I  will  venture  to  fay  again,  is  a 
deplorable  Condition  for  any  Church  to  be  in, 
whether  fhe  has  Revenues  of  her  own,  or  fubfifts- 
upon  Charity  •,  and  none  can  be  more  fenfible  of 
it,  than  the  Society  itfelf. 

This  State,  which  is  deplorable  in  itfelf,  is  alfa 
unprecedented  and  unparalleled.  That  other  Chur- 
ches have  not  been  as  great  Sufferers  as  the  Church 
of  England  in  the  Colonies,  was  never  pretended. 
Perhaps  all  really  perfecuted  Churches  have,  upon 
the  whole,  fuffered  as  much,  and  many  certainly 
have  fuffered  infinitely  more  ;  while  the  Members 
of  fome,  have  made  loud  Complaints  of  Perfecu- 
tion,  who  have  not  had  fo  juft  Reafon  to  complain, 
as  we  have.  But  if  the  Suffering  of  the  American 
Church  of  England  is  not  uncommon  as  to  the  De- 
gree of  it,  yet  all  muft  allow  that  it  is  of  a  very. 

extraordinary 


DEFENDED.  139 

extraordinary  Nature.  In  what  Age,  in  what  Part  Sect. 
of  the  World,  can  a  like  Indance  be  found,  either  ^^• 
among  Chrillians  or  Pagans  ^  Where,  r.nd  v/hen, 
did  any  Nation  fuffer  its  own  Religion,  the  Reli- 
gion which  it  had  freely  chofen  and  eftablillied  at 
Home,  to  be  upon  a  worfe  Footing,  than  all  other 
Religions,  in  its  Colonies  ?  In  Colonies  confiding, 
not  of  conquered  Enemies,  but  of  Children  that 
had  iiTued  from  its  own  Loins  ?  If  an  Example  can 
be  found,  let  it  be  pointed  out.  We  will  then 
confefs  that  our  Cafe  is  not  unprecedented-,  but  ftill, 
that  it  is  not  very  bard,  we  will  never  confefs, 

But  fays  the  Doclor,  it  is  unaccountably  firange 
that  he  (the  Author  of  the  Appeal)  jhould  mention  it 
as  '  an  unprecedented  Cafe,'  and  defcribe  the  Church 
as  *•  fingled  out  for  the  firft  Examiple  of  it'.  We 
fay,  and  believe,  it  is  the  firft  •,  if  he  knows  of 
another,  let  him  produce  it.  Why,  fays  the  Doc- 
tor, did  he  never  hear  of  the  infinitely  more  difirejfed, 
Condition  of  the  great  Numbers  that  were  deprived^ 
fined,  imprifoned,  and,  in  other  Ways,  mofl  cruelly 
dealt  with,  in  the  Days  of  thofe  hard-hearted  Arch- 
bifbops,  Parker,  Bancroft,  JVhitgift,  and  Lainl? 
Yes,  I  have  heard  of  thefe  Things  -,  and  I  afilire 
him,  that  whatever  I  think  of  Deprivations  in  fome 
Cafes,  I  am  no  Friend  to  Pines  and  Imprifonments 
on  a  religious  Account.  But  I  never  heard  before, 
that  the  Cafe  here  mentioned,  was  parallel  with 
the  prefent  Cafe  of  the  Church  of  England  in  Ame- 
rica, or  that  it  was  a  Precedent  of  the  like  Nature  ; 
which  it  is  here  his  only  Bufinefs  to  ihew.  I  have 
■  heard  alfo  of  the  Babylonilh  Captivity;  and  I  be- 
lieve it  to  be  a  Precedent  as  much  to  the  Purpofe, 
as  the  Inftance  he  has  micntioned.  But  whether 
the  Inftance  was  pertinent  or  not,  fecins  to  have 

T  2  bee a 


I40  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,    been  thought  no  Matter  of  Confequence  i  it  was 
^^'     fufficient  for  his  Purpofe,  that  it  afforded   an  Op- 
portunity of  introducing  a  Number  of  Archbifhops, 
in  order  to  blacken  their  Charafters.  » 

As  to  the  Archbilhops  Parker  and  Whitgifr, 
they  fuperintended  and  condudcd  the  Affairs  of 
the  Church,  during  the  greateft  Part  of  Qiictn 
Ehzabeth's  Reign.  As  they  were  Men  of  Firmnefs 
and  Refolution,  fo  they  appear  to  have  been  not 
wanting  in  Temper  and  Moderation  at  the  fame 
Time.  The  Dodtor  reprefents  them  under  the  Idea 
of  Perfecutors  :  But  we  meet  but  with  few  Ads  of 
undue  Severity,  and  many  of  exemplary  Mildnefs 
and  Gentlenefs,  in  the  Courfe  of  their  Proce,edings.  . 
In  the  Appendix  to  the  Life  of  the  former  *,  Strype 
has  given  us  a  Letter  from  the  Queen  to  him,  in 
which  Ihe  blames  him  and  thp  other  Bilhops,  for  - 
their  Backwardnefs  in  urging  Conformity. 

As  to  Whitgift,  even  Wilfon,  who  was  more 
than  half  a  Puritan  himfelf,  fays  of  him,  that 
"  he  ftrove  to  prevail  on  the  Piiritans  with  Sweet- 
*'  nefs  and  Gentlenefs  ;  and  died— leaving  a  Name, 
"  like  a  fweet  Perfume  behind  him"  i.  We  learn 
from  Strype,  that  his  natural  Temper  was  mild,  and 
that  he  treated  even  his  great  Antagonift,  Cart- 
wright,  when  he  had  him  in  his  Power,  fo  courteouf- 
ly  and  kindly,  that  thiC  Earl  of  Leicefter,  the  Pa- 
tron of  the  latter,  thanked  the  Archbilhop  for  his 
remarkable  Civility  to  him.  One  of  his  worll  and 
mod  implacable  Enemies  was  the  fiery  Udal,  a 
Leader  of  the  Puritans :  When  this  Perfon   was 

under 

•  Book  II.  Numb.  XXIV. 

t  See  T^hree  Letters  to  the  Author  of  the  Confeffional ;  Let.  h 


DEFENDED.  141 

\mder  Sentence  of  Death  for  Felony,  the  Archbifliop  Sect. 
made-  Intereft  in  his  Favor,  and  adually  obtained  ^^' 
his  Pavdon,  according  to  the  fame  Hiflorian.  But  I 
need  net  be  particular,  as  the  general  Condudl  to- 
wards the  Puritans  under  the  Reign  of  Elizabethy 
and  therein  the  Behaviour  of  the  Archbilhops  was 
fully  vindicated  by  Secretary  Walfmgham^  who  was 
as  good  a  Judge  of  it  as  any  Man  in  the  Kingdom, 
and  bt  ing  always  inclined  to  favor  the  Puritans,  he 
cannot  be  fufpeclcd  of  Partiality  againft  them  \, 

BANCROFI^  \\'2S  more  rigorous  in  his  Meafurcs 
than  his  immediate  PredecelTor,  and  the  Times 
required  it.  Laud  was  ilill  more  fevere  than  Ban- 
croft, and  his  Provocations  were  greater.  I  un- 
dertake not  to  juilify  all  their  Proceedings;  for  I 
abhor  every  Appearance  of  Intolerance  and  Cruelty^ 
even  in  an  Archbifliop.  Thefe  Appearances  are 
thegreateil  Blemiflies  of  their  Chara6ters  \  and  they 
are  the  general  Reproach  of  the  Age  in  which  they 
afted.  There  was  not  a  Puritan  in  the  Kingdom 
at  that  Time,  nor  had  there  been  from  the  Begin- 
ning, who  did  not  give  inconteftible  Evidence,  that 
if  he  had  been  armed  with  the  like  Power,  he  v/ould 
have  prefled  Conformity  to  his  own  Syilem,  vv'ith 
as  unrelenting  Zeal,  as  either  of  thofe  Prelates.  Nor 
long  afterwards,  the  Puritans  became  poflefTed  of 
Power  \  Conformity  then  was  urged  with  a  Venge- 
ance. In  the  Colle6lion  of  Sermons  preached  before 
the  l(mg  Parliament^  Toleration  is  profefTedly  con- 
demned by  Eurgefs,  Cafe,  Calamy,  Baxter,  Newco- 
^len,  and  many  others,  as  one  of  the  greateft  Evils. 

But  to  return  to  the  Two  Archbifliops  :  If  we 
conceive  of  them  under  the   Idea  only  of  rigorous 

Exacters 

\  In  his  Letter  to  Monficur  Critoy,  in  Burnet's  Hift.  Ref. 
Vol.  II. 


THE    APPEAL 

ExacStcrs  of  Conformity,  we  do  them  Iniufllce.  It 
ought  to  be  remembered  that  they  were  Meii  of 
eminent  Abilities,  of  invincible  Integrity,  of  iindif- 
fembled  Piety,  and  zealous  Advocates  for  the  Pro- 
teflant  Religion.  "  Bancroft,  fays  Fuller,  was  a 
*'  moll  flout  Champion  to  affert  Church  Difcipline". 
But  to  Ihew  that  there  was  fomething  amiable  in  his 
Difpofition,  and  that  he  could  mingle  Kindnefs 
with  his  Severity  towards  fuch  as  appeared  to  be 
truly  confcientious,  he  gives  the  following  Inftan- 
ce :  "  An  honefl  and  able  Minifter  privately  pro- 
*'  tefled  to  him,  that  it  went  againfl  his  Conicience 
"  to  conform,  being  then  ready  to  be  deprived  : 
Which  Wayy  faith  the  Archbilhop,  voill you  live^ 
if  put  cut  cfyour  Benefice  ?  The  other  aniwered, 
he  had  no  Way  hut  to  go  a  beggings  and  put  himjelf 
on  Divine  Providence,  ^hat^  faith  the  Archbi- 
fhop,  you  Jh all  not  need  to  do^  but  come  tome,  and 
**  I  will  take  Order  for  your  M2i\nten^nct'\  * 

What  I  conceive  to  be  the  true  Character  of 
Laud,  I  will  give  in  the  Words  of  a  maflerly  and 
candid  Writer,  in  Anfwer  to  the  ConfeJfionaL 
*'  Here,  Sir,  give  me  Leave  to  pay  a  Debt  due  to 
^'  Truth,  and  to  the  Memory  of  Archbilhop  Laud, 
*'  whom  You  treat  in  a  Manner  very  unbecoming 
his  Character  and  your  own.  He  was  undoubted- 
ly much  too  vehement  in  his  natural  Tem.per  ; 
and  the  general  Difpofition  of  the  Times  on  Jboth 
•*  Sides  increafed  his  Heat.  He  was  alfo  too  fond 
"  of  Externals  in  Religion.  But  fome  Regard 
"  ought  to  be  paid  to  his  Learning,  his  Liberality, 
"  his  excellent  Book  againfl  Popery,  and  the  fuc- 
"  cefsful  Pains  which  he  fo  kindly  took  to  recover 
"  Chillingworth  back  from  it.     His  very  candid 

"  Treatment 

*  Fuller's  Church  Hiftory  Book  X.  p.  57. 


IV. 


DEFENDED,  143 

^^  Treatment  likewife  of  the  famous  John  Hales,  Sect^ 
''  and  the  Efteem  of  that  great  Man  for  him,  who 
*'  mourned  for  his  Death  in  a  moil  remarkable 
"  Manner,  and  wilhed  he  had  died  in  his  ilead, 
"  prove  him  to  have  had,  together  with  his  very 
^'  blameable  Rlo-ors,  no  fmail  Merit  of  the  g-ood- 
"  natured  Kind  ^  to  which,  Perlbns  in  after  Times, 
*'  who  could  not  know  him  fo  well,  have  by  no 
"  Means  done  fufficient  Juftice"  *. 

The  Do6lor  goes  on  :  Did  he  never  hear  of  any 
harharous  A^s  faffed  in  the  Reign  of  King  Charles  II. 
fiihjeciing  Multitudes  of  Clergymen  and  others  to 
Hardjhips  and  Sufferings^  not  to  he  thought  of  with- 
out Horror  ?  This  Queilion  I  muft  alfo  anfwer  in 
the  affivmative.  I  have  heard  of  all  thofe  Adls 
which  are  here  called  barbarous  ;  and  I  have  feen 
the  Reafons  afligned  for  framing  and  pafling  them— 
which  Reafons,  if  not  altogether  fufficient  tojuftify, 
will  go  very  far  towards  excufing,  th&m. 

We  are  told  in  a  Note,  that  hy  one  of  thofe  Aofs 
(meaning  the  Ad:  of  Uniformity)  no  lefs  than  Two 
Thousand  Minijiers^  many  of  them  Men  of  fhining 
Accomflifhments^  and  ALL  of  them  well  fpoken  of 
for  their  Piety ^  were  turned  out  of  their  Livings  in 
cne  black  Day^  whereby  both  they  and  their  Families, 
became  liable  to  fiarve  for  Want  of  the  Neceffaries  of 
Life,  The  Chara6ler  of  the  ejedled  Minifters  as 
given  by  Walker,  v/ho  made  the  moft  indefatigable 
Examination  into  the  perfonal  Hiflory  of  thofe 
Times,  is  very  different  from  what  the  Do6lor  here 
publifhes,  after  Calamy  and  others.  His  Account 
is  too  long  to  be  inferted  •,  but  the  Subflance  of  it, 
as  extraded  by  Grey,  and  given  in  his  Anfwer  to 

Peirce, 

•  Let.  I.  p.  46. 


144  THE    APPEAL 

Sect*  Peirc€,   is  in  the fe  Words :  *■'•  But   to  confider  tFie 
IV,     tt  Number  and  Chara6ters  of  t.he  Perfons  a  little  far- 
"  ther,  we  learn  from  anlliuorian  of  good  Credit, 
that  thofe  who  gave  up  their  Livings  to  the  riglH 
Ourtiers^  which  had  been  ttfurped  xrom  tliem,  and 
which  in  Right  and  Juilice  w^erc  to  be  reilored, 
and  the  Curates  who  were  prevented  having  any 
Preferments,    without    Conformity,    made    up 
''  above  half  of  the  Number  ♦,  and  amongil   them 
'^  there  were  not   a  fevo  Mechanicks^  and  Fellows 
"  bred  to  the  meaneil   Occupations  ;  many  m.ore 
*'  who  had  feen  neither  of  the  Univerfities  •,  feveral 
*'  Troopers  and  others  who  had  ferved  in  the  Re- 
bels  Armies  •,    befides,  fome  had  run  in  with, 
and  vented  many  of  the  diilinguifhed  Enthufi- 
afms,    Errors,    Herefies,    and   other    monilrous 
Opinions,  not  to  fay  Blafphemies  of  the  Times  ; 
many  had  no  Orders  at  all,  nor  wer^ there  want- 
ing amongfc  thefe,  fuch  as  had  been  lb  far  from 
pretending  to   any, '  that  they  utterly  exclaimed 
"  againfl  them  ;  fome  had  a  Thoufand  Times /or- 
''  feited  their  Lives  to  the  Law,  by  having  their 
*'  Tongues   and  Hands   ftained  in   Treafon    and 
*'  Blood,  as  well  of  their  Prince  himfelf,  as  Fel- 
"  low-Subjeds.     Nay,  the  fame  Author  informs 
"  us,  that  to  the  bell  of  his  Remembrance,  he 
*'  had  not  met  with  an  Inftance  of  more  than  one 
"  fmgle  Perfon,  who  had  any  other  Title  antece- 
"  dent  to  the  urgent  Neceffity  of  the  A61  of  i66o> 
*■'  to  the  Places  from  which  they  were  removed, 
"  than  what  Sequcllration,    Plunder,  Ufurpation 
"  and  Rebellion  had  given  tliem.    So  that  the  Cale 
*'  is  not  fo  lamentable,  as  this  Gentleman  and  his 
"  Brother  Calamy  would  have  it ;  and  whe^  tKey 
•'  pretend  that  the   Sufferings  of  thefe  Men  vhW 
"  fcarce  admit  of  a  Parallel  in  anv  Age  or  Nati- 


(( 


iC 

cc 


<c 


(C 


DEFEND  ED.  145 

on,   they  little  confider  that  the  Numbers  of  the   Sect. 
oppofite  Side  exceeded  them  at  lead  feven  to     ^^* 
one,    being    according   to  the    mofl   moderate 
"  Computation    above   Seven    Thousand  ;    and 
"  taking  into  the    Account  fuch   as  Mr.   Peirce 
"  and  Dr.  Calamy  account  fufFerers  on  their  Side, 
"  fall  very  little  fhort  of  Ten  Thoufand*."  Arch- 
bilhop    Bramhall^     who    lived    in     thofe    Times, 
gives  a  fimilar  Reprefentation.     "  Let  Mr.   Bax- 
''  ter^  fays^he,  fum  up  into  one  Catalogue,  all  the 
''  Nonconformifts  throughout  the  Kingdom  of  Eng- 
"  land^  ever  fmce  the  Beginning  of  the  Reforma- 
"  tion,  who  have  been  caft  afide  or  driven  away 
**  at  any  Time,  becaufe  they  durft  not  ufe  the  old 
*'  Ceremonies  or  the  new^  or  rather  becaufe  they 
"  found  it  advantageous  to  them  to  difufe  them.  I 
^'  dare  abate  him  all  the  reft  of  the  Kingdom,  and 
"  only  exhibit  the  Martyrologies  of  London  and 
"  the  two  Umverfities,  or  a  Lift  of  thofe  who  in 
"  thefe  late  inteftine  Wars,  have  been  haled  away 
"  to  Prifons,  or  chafed  away  into  Baniihment  by 
"  his  own  Party,  in  thefe  three  Places  alone,  or 
"  left  to  the  mercilefs  World  to  beg  their  Bread, 
"  for  no  other  Crime  than  Loyalty,  and  becaufe 
"  they  ftood    affl^ded  to  the   ancient  Rites   and 
"  Ceremonies .  of  the  Church  of  England ;    and 
"  they  Ihall  double  them  for  Number,    and  for 
Learning,  Piety,  Induftry  and  the  Love  of  Peace, 
exceed  them   incomparably.      So   as  his  Party 
which  he  glorieth  fo  much  in,  will  fcarely  de- 
"  ferve  to  be  named  the  fame  Day.     And  if  he 
"  compare  their  Perfecutions  -,    the  Sufferings  of 
"  his  fuppofed  Confeifors  will  appear  to  be   but 
"  Flea-Bitings  in  Coniparifon  of  theirs.    But  after 
"  alf  this,  the  greateft  Difparity  remaineth  yet  un- 

U  "  touchedj 

*  Anfcver  to  P^/rc^,  p.  i;^!' 


146  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  «  touched,  that  is,  in  the  Caufe  of  their  SufFer- 
■  '  t^  ings.  The  one  fufFered  for  Faith,  and  the  other 
^'  for  Fa^ion^"  Thefe  Things,  it  muft  be  con- 
fefled,  have  but  little  Gonnedion  with  the  Subjedt. 
They  ought  alfo,  if  pofTible,  for  the  Honour  of 
the  national  Charadter,  and  the  proteflant  Religi- 
on, to  be  buried  in  eternal  Oblivion.  But  I  have 
been  forced  to  mention  them  ;  and  thofe  who  have 
obliged  me  to  it  ought  not  to  blame  me ;  while 
others  who  fee  the  Provocation,  I  truil,  will  at 
leaft  think  me  excufeable. 

As  to  the  1^eft~J^,  the  Do6lor  need  not  be  told 
the  only  Defign  of  it,  was  to  prevent  the  Enemies 
of  the  Church  from  gating  Power  to  deilroy  Her. 
.This  Security  it  was  thought  neceffary  to  provide  ; 
and  Rapin,  who  was  a  Prelbytcrian  himfelf,  has  in 
Efit.  juftified  the  gereral  Policy  of  that  Adb.  For 
he  makes  no  Scruple  to  declare,  in  his  Dtjfertation 
m  the  W}:igs  and  i'ories,  not  that  there  is  a  Proba- 
bility, for  he  knew  it  to  be  more  than  probable — 
but,  that  "  'tis  certain^  if  the  Prefbyterians  can 
"  ever  aft  withour  Controul,  they  will  not  be  fa- 
tisfied  till  the  Hierarchy  of  the  Church  of  En- 
gland be  intirely  demolijhed.^^  That  fuch  Perfons 
theretore  ihould  be  fo  far  controuled,  as  they  arc 
by  this  A6i:,  will  not,  I  believe,  be  pronounced  to 
be  unjuit  or  improper  by  any,  but  thofe  who  find 
themfelves  difa:ppointed  by  its  Operation.  But  I 
will  not  inlarge  upon  this  Subje6l,  fmce  writing  in 
Favour  of  the  Teft-Ad,  or  fome  other  equivalent 
Security,  is  as  needlefs,  as  writing  againft  it  will  bcj 
ufelefs,  after  what  has  been  faid  in  Vindication  oi 
it  by  the  late  Bilhops  Sherlock  and  Ellys. 

What 

J  JBramhalH  Works,  p.  643. 


IV. 


DEFENDED.  147 

What  the  Dodlor's  Quellion  infinuates  about  Se^ct. 
the  Removal  of  our  Fore-Fathers  from  their  native 
Land^  may  be  true  of  fome  of  them  ;  but  it  by- 
no  Means  appears  to  be  true  of  all  of  them,  ef- 
pecially  of  the  Settlers  of  the  Maffachufetts  Colony, 
that  they  were  fojced  abroad  by  the  opprejftve 
Power  of  the  Bifhbps.  But  were  it  the  Cafe*,  they 
are,  on  this  Oceafion,  introduced  very  imperti- 
nently. 

The  Do(5lor  concludes  this  Affair  of  Precedents 
in  a  Strain  truly  confident  with  his  w^hole  Repre- 
fentation.  This  double  Decimation  of  our  Can- 
didates, or  the  Lofs  of  fo  great  a  Proportion  of 
their  Lives,  is  no  more  in  his  Eftimation,  than  one 
of  the  few  comparatively  fmall  Inconveniencies^  to 
which  the  American  Church  of  England  is  fubjedt, 
p.  94.  And  as  to  the  Expence  of  crofling  the 
Atlantic  for  Ordination,  what  is  a  Hundred  Pounds 
Sterlings  fays  he,  for  Fifty-two  Clergymen  each^  in 
the  Courfe  of  Sixty  Tears,  in  Comparifon  with  the 
Hundred  Thoufand  Pounds  Sterlings  many  Times  toldy 
that  DiJJenters  have  paid,  tozvards  the  Support  of  the 
epifcopal  Clergy,    hefides   maintaining   their   own  ? 

U  2  p.  (^S^ 


*  "  Obftrve,'*  fays  honeft  John  Whitings  in  his  Truth  and 
Innocency  defended  againft  Faljhood  and  Ennjy,  *'  the  horrid  A- 
**  poftacy  of  thefe  Men  :  Flee  Perfecution^  and  yet  turn  the 
"  greateft  Perfecutors  themfeives,  next  to  the  PapiUs  !  Seek 
**  new  Habitation?,  for  Want  of  Liberty,  and  yet  deny  it  to 
"  others  !-.-What  were  thofe  (Sufferings  of  the  Puritants)  to 
**  the  Sufferings  they  inflifted  on  our  Friends  \n  Ne-i's-Eng- 
*'  landV  If  they  (the  Perfons  in  Power  at  Home)  **  whiped 
**  any,  as  they  did  John  Lilhorney  the  Pref  jyterians  exceeded 
**  them  ;  witnefs  W.  Brendy  Anne  Colman  and  others  :  and 
**  if  they  cut  off  the  Ears  of  fome,  as  Burton^  Baji-ivick  and 
"  Prinny  they  did  not  cut  off  their  Heads,  or  hang  them,  as 
**  thej  did  our  Friends  m  Ne'W'Englmd**\ 


148  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.   p.  g^.  That  what  tbe  Dijfenters  have  paid^  in  the 
^^'     Way  of  Tithes,  towards  the  Support  of  the  epifco- 
cal  Clergy^  ought  not  to  be  included  in  this  Ac- 
count, has  been  proved  in  the  Tenth  Se^ion  of  the 
Appeal,  which   the  Do6lor,  for  a  certain  Reafon, 
has  thouo;ht  fit  not  to  controvert.    After  this  De- 
duclion,  he  will  find  it  difficult  to  make  all  his 
Items  amount  to  the  Sum  of  a  Hundred  Thoufand 
Pounds  Sterlings  many  Times  told^  within  the  Courfe 
of  Sixty  Tears ^  unlefs  he  takes  into  his  Computation 
the  Pofts  of  Profit  in  the  Kingdom  of  South-Bri- 
tain, from  which  DifTenters  may  have  been  ex-     | 
eluded.     As  he  feems  to  look  upon  thefe  as  their    | 
natural  Rights,  it  mufl  be  confefTed,  that,  in  this     " 
View  of  the  Matter,  there  is  no  Impropriety  in 
confidering   all  that  might  have  been  gained  by 
fuch  Pofls,  under  the  Notion  of  Lofs,  and  pafTing 
it  to  the  Credit  of  the  DifTenters  Account.     But 
this  will  not  be  admitted  as  fair,  by  the  World  in     1 
general,    which   has  a  different   Idea  of  natural 
Rights. 

.  Natural  Rights,  when  the  Expreflion  is  uled 
properly,  can  fignify  nothing  lefs  than  fuch  Rights 
as  Men  are  born  to^ — fuch  as  they  are  intitled  to 
upon  the  common  Footing  of  Humanity,  without 
any  Dillin(5lion  of  Chriflian  or  Pagan,  Proteftant 
or  Papift.  Whatever  therefore  is  the  natural  Right 
of  one  Man,  is  the  natural  Right  of  another  •,  and 
if  Diffenters  may  juflly  complain  of  being  deprived 
of  a  natural  Right,  in  the  Cafe  before  us,fo  may  Pa- 
pifls,  Jews  and  Mahometans ;  their  natural  Rights 
being  the  very  fame  with  thofe  of  the  Diffenters, 
and,  I  may  add,  of  the  Members  of  the  efta- 
blifhed  Church.  This  is  fo  evident,  that  all  Au- 
thors have  either  afferted  or  admitted  it,   a  few 

Inftancct 


DEFENDED.  149 

Inftances  only  excepted.  The  American  Whig  is  ^^^'^' 
obliged  to  confefs*,  that  if  by  natural  Right  he 
meant  any  Right  in  Contradtftin^ion  to  municipal  or 
political  Rights,  i.  e.  to  fuch  as  are  not  natural 
Rights,  it  may  with  casual  Propriety  be  predicated  of 
Epifcopalians,  and  of  all  Men.  For  no  Man  has  a  na- 
tural Right  to  a  political  Privilege,  What  the  Dif- 
fenters  municipal  or  political  Rights  are  in  England, 
and  how  far  they  intitle  them  to  thofe  Preferments, 
from  which  they  are  excluded  by  Adls  of  Parli^- 
ment,  is  not  my  Bufmefs  to  inquire. 

I  AM  next  led  to  review  a  PafTage  in  the  Appeal, 
which  uncommon  Pains  has  been  taken  to  pervert, 
with  a  Defign  of  making  me  appear  to  have  been 
an  Impeacher  of  the  Loyalty  of  the  Diflenters 
in  America.  The  obnoxious  PalTage  is  this  :  '  We 
*  /'.  e.  the  Members  of  the  Church  of  England, 
'  are  confcious  of  no  Crimes,  with  Regard  to  the 
'  State.  On  the  other  Hand,  we  claim  a  Right  tp 
'  be  confidered  as  equal  with  the  Foremoft'  (the 
American  Whig,  to  anfwer  a  Purpofe  of  his  own, 
quotes  it,  the  most  Foremoft)  '  in  every  due  Ex- 
prefTion  of  Fidelity  and  Loyalty.  We  efteem  our- 
lelves  bound,  not  only  by  prefent  Intereft  and 
Inclination,  but  by  the  more  facred  Ties  of  our 
religious  Principles  and  Chriftian  Duty,  to  fup- 
port,  to  the  utmoft,  the  national  civil  Efta- 
blifhment.  Accordingly  no  Trumpet  of  Sedi- 
tion was  ever  heard  to  found  from  our  Pulpits — 
no  Seeds  of  DifafFedion  have  been  fufFered  more 
privately  to  be  fown  in  our  Houfes.  As  our  Re- 
ligion teaches  us,  in  the  firft  Place,  and  above  all 
Things,  to  fear  God  \  fo,  while  we  can  preferve 
it,  it  will  be  a  full  Security  to  the  Government 

for 
*  Numb.  XVL 


IV. 


150  TH  E    APPEAL 

Secto  t  {qyout  honouring  the  King^  dindnot  meddling  with 
'  them  that  are  given  to  Change^  P-  4i-  In  this 
PaiTage  it  is  evident,  tliat  the  Loyalty  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  the  Colonies,  is  (Irongly 
aflerted  ;  which  Loyalty  our  Enemies  have  never 
pretended  to  difpute.  The  American  Whig^  is  fo 
juft  as  to  take  Notice  of  the  Author  of  the  Ap- 
feaPs  "  piofefTed  Loyalty,"  and  of  "  that  Zeal 
*'  for  the  Conllitution  and  Government  at  Home, 
*^  to  which  he  and  his  Brethren  avow  a  warm  At- 
"  tachment."  Dr.  Chauncy  allows  the  Loyalty  of 
Epifcopalians  to  be  equal  with  that  of  other  Deno- 
minations of  Men  in  this  Country.  Now  no  more 
than  this  is  dired:ly  afferted  in  the  Appeal  But  the 
former  infifts-f  that  the  Author,  in  the  above  Paf- 
fage,  "  plainly  intended  to  infmuate,  that  fome 
*'  other  Denominations  among  us  are  confcious  of 
*'  Crimes  with  Refpe5f  to  the  State.^^  The  Dodlor  is 
not  pojitive  as  to  this  Matter,  but  cautioufly  fays, 
fome  are  disposed  to  think  he  (the  Author  of  the 
Appeal)  would  not  have  expreffed  himfelf  in  this 
Manner^  unlefs  he  had  intended  an  Infinuation^  that 
fomething  of  this  Nature  had  been  done  by  others,  p. 
96.  The  Reader  can  examine  the  PafTage  for 
himfelf,  and  judge,  whether  the  Interpretation  of 
it,  concerning  which  the  American  Whig  is  pofitive, 
and  the  Dodtor  doubtful,  is  not  forced  and  unna- 
tural. For  furely,  to  fay  that  our  Loyalty  is  equal 
with  that  of  others,  implies  not  that  it  is  fuperior, 
or  that  the  Loyalty  of  others  is  defedtive,  unlefs 
Words  are  perverted  from  their  natural  Meaning  : 
It  rather  implies,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  Loyal- 
ty of  others  is  not  inferior  to  ours. 

This 

*  Numb.  II.  t  In  Numb.  IX, 


DEFENDED.  151 

This  feems  to  be  admitted  by  the  periodical  Sict. 
Writer  laft  mentioned.  But  then  he  interrogates,  ^^• 
why  I  was  not  fatisjied  with  /imply  avering  that  my 
Brethren  were  as  loyal  Siihje^ls  as  others  ?  I  doubt 
not  but  the  candid  and  impartial  have  been  able  to 
fee  the  following  Reafon  for  it,  and  that  it  fuffici- 
ently  Accounts  for  the  Mode  of  Expreflion.  The 
Paragraph  is  introduced  with  this  Obfervation,  that 
notwithftanding  the  fuffering  Condition  of  the  A-- 
merican  Church,  we,  who  are  Members  of  it^  '  are 
'  not  apprehenfive  that  it  can  be  owing  to  the  Dif- 

*  pleafure  of  our  Superiors.'  Why  not  apprehen- 
five of  their  Difpleafure  ?  Becaufe  we  are  confcious 
of  no  Crimes  that  have  deferved  it.  '  No  Trumpet 

*  of  Sedition  was  ever  heard  to  found  from  our 

*  Pulpits — no  Seeds  of  DifafFeftion  have  been  fuf- 

*  fered  more  privately  to  be  fown  in  our  Houfcs.* 
Thefe  Crimes,  or  the  Sufpicions  of  them,  are  the 
common  Caufes  of  the  Difpleafure  of  Government, 
againft  particular  Clafles  or  Denominations  of  Men, 
in  all  Countries.  But  we  are  intirely  innocent,  and 
fuch  Crimes  have  never  been  fo  much  as  imputed 
to  us.  On  the  other  *Hand,  our  Intereft  aad  Incli^ 
nation  conlpire  with  our  religious  Principles,  to  fe- 
cure  our  Loyalty.  We  confider  it  as  a  Matter  of 
toict  Duty  and  of  religious  Obligation  to  "  honor 
"  the  King,"  and  "  not  to  meddle  with  them  that 
"  a,re  given  to  Change,"  as  really  and  eflentially  as 
to  "  fear  God."  This  appears  to  me  to  be  the 
natural  Conftrudion  of  the  Paragraph  ;  and  it  cor- 
refponds  exadlly  with  my  View  in  writing  it,  which 
was  only  to  maintain,  by  a  IKort  Induction  of  Par- 
ticulars, that  we  are  free  from  thofe  Crimes  and 
Imputations,  which  are  commonly  affigned  as  Rea- 
fons  for  the  Frowns  of  Government ;  and  confe- 

quently 


152  T  HE    APPEAL 

Sect,   quently  that  w©  have  no  Caufe  to  fufpedl  the  Go- 
^^*     vernment  at  Home  is  difpleafed  with  us. 

In  tranfcribing  for  the  Prefs,  I  faw  what  Ufc 
might  be  made  of  the  Paflage  by  ill-difpofed  Per- 
fons ;  and  therefore,  not  thinking  it  neceflary  to 
alter  the  Stru(5lure  of  the  Paragraph,  added  this 
iV(9/<?,  to  fecure  it  againft  Mifinterpretation  and  A- 
bufe.     '  This  Declaration  is  not  intended  to  imply 

*  any  Accufation  of  others  ;  who  are  able,  it  is 

*  hoped,  to  make  their  own  Defence,  whenever 

*  the  Occafion  Ihall  require  it.  His  Majefly's  A- 
*•  merican  Subjects,  of  all  Denominations,  belong- 

*  ing  to  the  old  Colonies,  have  always  profefTed 
,        *  Sentiments  of  Loyalty  ;  and  the  Author  believes 

^  they  have  generally  been  Jincere  in  thofe  Profef- 

*  libns.'  I  then  proceeded  to  account  for  fome 
late  undutiful  Appearances,  in  a  Manner  confiltent 
with  the  Loyalty  profeiTed.  Now,  does  this  look 
like  an  Impeachment  of  American  Loyalty  ?  Is  it 
not  in  Reality,  a  Defence  of  it  ?  How  unfair  and 
unrighteous  then  is  it,  to  endeavour  to  raife  a  po- 
pular Clamour  againft  me,  on  the  fole  Evidence 
of  this  very  PafTage  ;  a  Paftage,  which  proves  that 
I  have  a6ted  the  Part  of  a  true  Friend,  where  I  am 
abufed  for  having  a6led  as  an  Enemy !  Upon  the 
whole  :  If  die  Words  in  the  Text  naturally  carried 
an  Infmuation  againft  the  Loyalty  of  fome  Ameri- 
cans^ which  Infmuation  was  not  intended  ;  the  Ex- 
planation in  the  Note  intirely  removes  it,  and  places 
the  Matter  in  the  moft  favourable  Light.  Nothing 
worfe  is  faid  of  Americans,  including  the  various 
religious  Denominations,  than  that  they  have  always 
profelTed  Sentiments  of   Loyalty*,    and  that  the 

Author 

*  Had  Numh.  V.  of  the  American  Whig  been  then  publish- 
ed. 


DEFENDED.  153 

Author  believed  them  to  have  been  generally  fin-  Sect. 
cere  in  thofe  Profeffions. 

The  Do6lor  will  not  allow,  that  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  Colonies  is  '  diilinguiflied  and  ftig- 
'  matized  by  a  Want  of  thofe  religious  Privileges 
'  which  are  granted  to  all  other  Denominations.' 
His  Objection  is  this  :  ^he  'Truth  is^  Epifcopalians 
are  allowed  the  fame  Liberty  with  all  other  Perfuajl- 
ons,  and  do^  with  as  much  Freedom  from  Molejlati- 
on^  worjhip  God  in  the  precife  Way  they  themfelves 
are  f  leafed  to  chufe^  p.  97.    But  can  he  be  fericus 
when  he  fays  this  ?  Or  does  he  nKan  to  infvilt  us  P 
Is  it  the  Truths  that  we  have  the  fame  Liberty  with 
all  other  Perfufions }  Do  they  not  all  enjoy  their 
own   religious   Syilems  compleatly,  and  in  every 
Part  ?  But  can  this  be  predicated  of  the   Church 
of  England?  We  complain  that  we  are  deilitute  of 
the  Power  of  Ordination,  and  are  not   allowed  to 
enjoy  feveral   of  the   Inflitutions  of  our  Church, 
v/hich  we  hold   in  great  Efteem  and  Veneration  :, 
l*he  Do(5lor  anfv/ers  that  we  worlliip  God  in  our 
own  Way  without  Moleftation.  But  does,  this  Anf- 
wer  come   up  to  the  Complaint }  Did  we  ever  pre- 
tend that  the  Privilege  of  worihiping  God,    ac- 
cording to  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England^ 
was  refufed  us  }    Does  our  Enjoyment  of  this  Pri- 
vilege prove,  that  we  are  not  under  thofe  peculiar 
Difadvantages  which  the  Complaint  fpecifies  ?  And 
if  we   are  under  Difadvantages  which  are  peculiar 
to  ourfelves,  and  from  which   all  other  Denomina- 
tions are  free,  having  all  of  them   the  full  Ufe  of 
their  refpective  Forms  of  ecclefiailical  Difcipline 

X  and 

€d;  I  (hould  perhaps  have  excepted  the  Author,  ard  the  A- 
bettors,  of  that  Performance,  as  Perfons  whole  Lo)  alty  is,  a^ 
kail,  very  queftionable, 


IV. 


154  THE     APPEAL 

Se^ct.  and  Government,  have  we  not  Reafon  to  complaii) 
that  we  ONLY  are  not  permitted  the  Ufe  of  ours  i 
Why  fhould  there  be  this  glaring  Diftindion  ? 
Where  our  Claims  are,  at  Icail,  equal  with  thofe 
of  our  Neighbours,  why  fhould  a  Difference  be 
made  in  their  Favour  ? 

ALL  the  Difference^  fays  the  Doftpr,  is^  our. 
Principles  do  not  hamper  us  with  thofe  obje^ed  Diffi- 
culties^ theifs  expofe  them  to.  With  equal  Candour 
and  Propriety  it  might  have  been  faid,  by  the  Mem- 
bers of  the  eftablifhed  Church,  in  the  Days  of  thofe. 
hard-hearted  Archbifhops  Parker^  Bancroft^  Whit- 
gift  and  Laud :  Why  do  thefe  Puritants  complain  ? 
Are  they  not  treated  upon  the  fam^e  Footing  with 
ourfelves  ?  We  know  of  nothing  that  has  been  grant- 
ed to  us  or  others^  but  what  is  equally  granted  tq 
them :  All  the  Difference  is^  our  Principles  dg  not 
hamper  us  with  thofe  obje5ied  Difficulties^  their' s  ex- 
pofe  thetn  to.  And  this  the  greateii  Perfecutors  that 
ever  exiiled  may  have  as  pertinently  faid,  of  thofe 
whom  they  harrafTed  and  put  to  the  Torture — 
they  are  only  hampered  by  their  own  Principles, 
and  they  may  thank  themfelves. 

I  MEET  with  nothing  farther  that  is  worthy  of 
Notice, '  untill  we  comx  to  the  concluding  Para- 
graph of  this  Se5fion.,  in  p.  loo,  where  I  am  charg- 
ed with  having  been  ungrateful  and  undutiful.  My 
Ingratitude.,  it  feems,  cohfifts  in  uttering  Com- 
plaints, '  in  Behalf  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
*  America^  after  'Thirty  Thoufand  Pounds  Sterlings 
have  been  expended  in  England  to  promote  its 
Growth.  But  by  whom  has  this  Sum  been  exr 
pended  ?  Not  by  the  Nation,  but  by  a  particular 
Society.  I  know  not  that  the  Nation  has  ever 
been  at  any  confiderable  Expence,    to  promote 

th^ 


DEFENDED.  155 

tht  Growth  of  the  Church  in  the  Colonies;  and  Sect. 
as  this  was  not  expcfted,  fo  their  not  doina  it  has     l^' 
never  been  mentioned  as  Matter  of   Complaint. 
But  what  we  complain  of  is,  that  the  national  Re- 
ligion in  the  Colonies  has  not  been  made  the  ObjecT: 
of  greater  national  Attention,  in  fome  other  Ref- 
pe«s ;  and  particularly,  that  fuch  Relief  has  not 
been  given  it,  as  it  was  known  greatly  to  fuffer  for 
the^  Want  of  and  as  might  have  eafily  been  granted 
witnoiit  any  public  Expence.   So  much,  we  think,' 
we  had  Reafort  to  expeft  ;  and   I  can  fee  nothine 
unbecoming  or  improper  in  the  Complaint.    If  I 
had  complained  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation 
of  the  Go/pel,  the  Doftor  then  might  juitlv  have 
branded  me  with  Ingratitude.     Our  great'  Bene- 
taetors  are  the  worthy  Members  of  that  Society  •  it 
IS  they  who  have  expended  the  large  Sums  for  the 
bupport  and  Promotion  of  the  Church  here,  which 
the  Doftor  has  feen  fit  to  transfer  from  their,  to  the 
national  Account.     But  we  lliall  always  remember 
that  it  IS  to  them,  that  our  Gratitude  is  immediately 
due ;  and  if  the  leaft  Symptom  of  Ingratitude  to  that 
venerable  Body  can  be  difcovereJ  in  the  yapped,  I 
hereby  promife,  that  I  will  never  attempt  any  far- 
ther Defence  of  it.  ^       i 

As  to  the  other  Charge  of  Undutifulnefs,  it  is 
made  out  in  this  Manner.  //  //„  ^M  the  Kim 
whether  we  Ihall  have  Bilhops  or  not ;  therefore  fo 
complain  of  the  Want  of  Bifhops,  is  to  refleft 
upon  the  King ;  and  to  refled  upon  the  King  is  un- 
dutiftih  The  Author  of  the  ^^^,^/ har  com- 
plained of  the  Want  of  Bifliops  :  Ergo,  the  Au- 
thor of  the  Jppeal  has  been  undutiful  to  the  Kina 
/  could  wifh  fays  the  Doftor,  he  had  extrefied 
more  dutiful  Reverence  towards  his  Sovereign,  than      ■ 


IV 


156  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  //?  charge  him  as  he  does  virtually  and  in  Reality 
of  Conjlrucfion^  with  treating  the  Church  here  with 
unpcirallelcd  Hardfioip^  Sic.  I  afllire  the  Do6Vor,  it 
gives  nic  the  utmoll  Pleafure  to  find  him  lb  zea- 
lous for  maintaining  a  dutiful  Reverence  towards 
our  moil  gracious  Sovereign.,  and  fo  ready  to  bear 
Teilimony  againil  every  Thing  that  appears,  vir- 
tually and  in  Reality  of  Conflruuiion.,  to  refledt  upon 
his  facred  Perfon.  Let  me  tell  him  however,  that 
he  is  probably  fomewhat  miftaken,  with  Regard  to 
the  Matter  before  us.  It  has  been  all  along  fup- 
pofed  and  believed,  that  the  Want  of  an  American 
Kpifcopate  has  not  been  owing  to  any  Backward- 
nefs  in  our  Kings  to  grant  it,  but  to  the  Negle6l 
of  others,  wliole  Duty  it  was  to  prepare  the  Way 
for  fuch  an  /\ppointment.  The  Complaint  can  be  a 
Reflection  on  thofe  only,  who  have  negle6led  their 
Duty  •,  but  as  our  Kings  appear  not  to  have  been 
negligent  of  theirs,  it  is  no  Reflection  upon  them  : 
—Much  lefs,  upon  ourprefent  mofl;  excellent  Sove- 
reign, who  has  ccndefcended  to  exprefs  himfelf  on 
the  Subjed:,  in  the  moll  obliging  Terms,  and  in 
whofe  favourable  Difpofition  we  have  an  intire 
Confidence. 

Although  the  King  can^  as  the  Dodlor  ob- 
ferves,  by  Virtue  of  that  Supremacy  which  the 
Conflitution  allows  him,  grant  an  American  Epif- 
copate  at  any  Time ;  yet  a  wife  King  will  not 
choofe,  and  his  real  Friends  will  not  defire  him,  to 
exert  this  Prerogative,  until  the  Way  is  duly  prepared, 
and  there  is  a  rational  Profpe6b  of  its  anfv/ering 
the  Purpofe.  In  Order  to  this,  it  has  been  thought 
requifite,  even  by  our  Convention,  as  zealous  as 
it  has  been,  flill  is,  and  I  trufl:  will  be,  in  the  Pro- 
fecution  of  this  Plan,  that  the  Nature  of  the  pro- 
jeded  Epifcopate  fhould  be  fully  underllood,  and 

generally 


DEFENDED.  157 

generally  approved  of,  by  the  various  Denomina-  Sect. 
tions  of  People  in  America,  And  it  is  one  good  ^* 
Eitedl  of  the  prefent  Controverfy,  for  which  I  now 
return  Thanks  to  my  Opponents,  that  our  Plan  has 
been  more  attentively  confidered,  and  more  fully 
underftood  :  Another  is,  that  it  has  produced  fuch 
Tefti monies  of  Approbation  as  were  wanted.  It 
Was  indeed  always  believed  the  Diflenters  would  not 
obje6t  to  our  having  fuch  Bifliops  as  are  propofed 
for  America  ;  but  we  had  no  public  Declarations 
that  thofe  of  the  Prefbyterian  or  Congregational 
Perfuafion  approved  of  our  Plan,  until  Dr.  Chaun- 
cy  and  the  American  JVhig^  who  have  appeared  in 
their  Behalf  on  the  Occafion,  were  pleafed  to 
make  them.  Thefe  Writers,  it  is  true,  ftiil  obje<5t, 
in  their  Names,  againfl  an  American  Epifcopate, 
fuppofing  it  may  be  different  from  what  has  been 
pretended  and  explained  to  the  Public.  But  as  to 
the  Epifcopate  really  intended,  concerning  which 
alone  their  Opinion  was  defired,  they  have  clearly 
exprefled  themfelves,  and  faid  as  much  in  Favour 
of  it  as  could  be  reafonably  expedled.  So  that  now, 
whatever  may  be  the  Fate  of  particular  Parts  or 
PafTages  of  the  Appeal^  the  great  and  immediate 
Defign  of  it  has  fucceeded,  and  the  Author  has  no 
Reafon  to  repent  of  his  having  undertaken  it. 


'SI/' vv  y^^ 


SECT. 


15*  THE   Appeal 

SECTION    V. 


Sect 


Ect.  /npHE  Bufinefs  of  the  Jifib  Seclion  of  the  Jp- 
JL  peal,  IS  to  afTign  Reaibns  why  the  Church  in 
America  has  been  fo  long  negleded.  The  Dodor 
confelTes  he  has  no  Concern  with  the  immediate  Con- 
tents of  it :  However,  there  are  fome  Matters  of 
Intelligence,  it  feems,  intermixed  with  the  Reafons 
affigned,  which  he  thinks  worthy  of  his  Animad- 
verfion. 

^    The  firfi:  PafTage  that  difturbs  him  is  the  fol- 
lowing :  '  The  Colonies  were  generally  fettled  by 
^'  private  Adventurers  ;  and  fome  of  them  by  thofe 
*  who  had   an  Averfion  to  epifcopal  Government* 
'  The  Propriety  of  not  lending  a  Bilhop  to  Co- 
'  lonies  of  the  latter  Sort,  will  be  difputed  by  none' 
(Appeal  p;  4^.)  He  does  not  attempt  to  ihew  that 
this  Obfervation  is  unjuft,  or  improper^   or  imper- 
tinent ^  but  yet  he  fpeaks  of  it  as  no  more  than  a 
Rattle  to  pleafe  Children   with,    and  then    afks  a 
Number  of  Qiieftions  relating  to  New-England, 
which  are  not  at  all  to  the  Purpofe,  but  upon  the 
buppofition  that  there   are,  at  this  Day,  no  Epif- 
copahans  in  thofe  Colonies.     For  what  I  had  ad- 
vanced was  this,  that  the  Propriety  of  not  fending 
l^iihops  to  thole  who  had  an  Averfion  to  epifcopal 
Government,  is  indifputable.    Let  us  try  notwith^ 
Itanding,  whether  any  Thing  can  be  made  of  his 
C^ieftions   and  Remarks,  however  foreign  or  out 
of  Place.     Slueft.  If  a  BifJjop  is  fent,  will  he  have 

nothing 


D  E  F  E  N  D  E  D.  159 

nothing  to  do  in  thefe  the  New -England  Colonies  ?  Sect. 
Anf.  Nothing  at  all,  but  with  fuch  Perfons  as  fhall  ^* 
be  defiroiis  of  his  Adminiftrations.  ^efl.  Will  they 
not  be  Part  of  his  Diocefs  ?  Anf.  Not  in  fuch  a  Senfe, 
as  to  bring  the  DifTenters  under  his  Jurifdi6lion. 
^ejl.  Will  not  the  epifcopal  Churches  in  them^  at  leafi 
their  Clergy^  he  under  his  Infpe^ion  and  Government  ? 
Anf  They  moft  certainly  will ;  but  this  can  do  no 
Harm  to  him,  or  any  others  of  the  Congregational 
or  Prefbyterian  Perfuafion.  He  will  then^  fays 
the  Doctor,  he  as  compleatly  fettled  at  the  Head  of 
the  epifcopal  Clergy.,  within  thefe  Bounds.,  as  in  the 
other  Colonies.,  and  will  have  the  fame  Right  of  fu- 
ferintending  and  governing  them.  Very  true  ;  but 
"why  fhould  not  the  epifcopal  Clergy  of  New-Eng* 
land  be  fuperintended  and  governed,  as  well  as 
thofe  of  the  other  Colonies  ?  They  do  not  defire 
to  be  exempted  themfelves,  and  it  never  has  been 
propofed  by  others.  But  attend  then  to  the  Con- 
fequence  :  If  his  (the  Bifhop's)  Place  of  Rejidence 
fhould  not  be  here.,  lays  he,  his  Power  will :  And  it 
will  he  the  fame  in  all  its  Exercifes.,  as  in  any  other 
of  the  Provinces,  But  if  the  Exercifes  of  his  Power 
are  to  be  confined  to  the  epifcopal  Clergy,  other 
People,  as  has  been  obferved,  need  not  be  anxious, 
whether  even  the  Place  of  his  Refidence  fhould  be 
in  New-England^  or  not.  It  is  really  furprizing  to 
find  a  Man  of  Senfe  and  Reputation  caviling  at  this 
Rate — refolved  to  be  fatisfied  with  nothing — atone 
Time  blaming  us,  becaufe,  under  the  propofed 
Epifcopate,  no  peculiar  Power  is  to  be  exercifed 
over  the  Laity — at  another,  finding  Fault  that  it 
is  to  be  exercifed  over  the  epifcopal  Clergy— and 
then  peevifhly  declaring  that  a  Bifhop,  as  odious 
and  deteflable  as  he  is,  may  as  well  refide  in  New- 
,  EitglarJ'  altogether,  as .  fuperintend  and  goverft  the 

Clergy 


i6o  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  Clergy  belonging  to  the  Church.  Such  invincible 
Prejudice  is  hardly  to  be  met  with  in  the  prefent 
Age.  It  reminds  me  of  an  Inftance  in  ancient 
Hiftory  :  "  John  came  neither  eating  nor  drinking, 
"  and  they  fay,  he  hatk  a  Devil.  The  Son  of  Man 
*'  came  eating  and  drinking,  and  they  fay,  behold 
"  a  Man  gluttonous  and  a  Wine-Bibber,  a  Friend 
*'  of  Publicans  and  Sinners"  j. 

The  next  Piece  of  Intelligence  the  Dodlor  takes 
in  Hand,  relates  to  the  Endeavours  of  the  Society 
to  obtain  an  Epifcopate  for  the  Church  in  America, 
But  I  find  not  that  he  is  able  to  fay  much  againft 
it,  or  to  infer  much  from  it.  I  fat  down  to  write 
this  Defence^  with  a  determined  Refoiution  to  treat 
Doctor  Chauncy  with  all  pofTible  Refped.  Hitherto 
I  have  adhered  to  it  with  great  Firmnefs  and  Punc- 
tuality, and  have  taken  Notice  of  many  Things, 
which  I  Ihould  have  paffed  over  as  unworthy  of 
Obfervation,  in  many  other  Writers.  But  as  I  think 
it  high  Time  to  Ihew  fome  Refped  alfo  to  the 
Reader,  the  good  Dodlor  will  excufe  me,  if  here- 
after he  ihould  not  find  me  fo  minutely  attentive 
to  him,  ,as  I  have  been.  Every  Thing  however  in 
the  lucceeding  Parts  of  his  Performance,  that  ap- 
pears to  me  to  have  either  of  the  two  Qualipes, 
Weight  or  Plaufibility,  ihali  be  duly  noticed; 

T7/£  laft  A7'ticle  of  Intelligence^  fays  he,  relates 
to  the  external  Circumftances  oftheBiJhop  that  is  defired 
to  he  fent  to  America.  A  Seat  has  been  pur  chafed  for 
his  Refidence^  at  Six  Hundred  Pounds,  Sterlings  Ex- 
pence^  in  a  convenient  Manfion-Houfe  and  Lands ^  fitu-. 
ate  at  Burlington,  in  the  Jerfies  •,  and  large  Legacies 
have   been  left   for  the  Support  of  an   American 

Epifcopate 

X  Matt.  XI.   i8,   19. 


DEFENDED.  i6i 

Epifcopate,  p.  104.     TKiz  is  the  Subftanceof  the  Sect. 
InteUigence.     Let  us  now  attend  to  the  Ufe  that  is     ^' 
made  of  it.  //  f  jj/ays  he,  unqiiejlionable^  if  a  Bijhop  is 
fent  to  America,  that  fuch  Frovifton  muft  be  made  for 
his  Support^  as  will  enable  him  to  appear  in  all  the 
Grandeur  of  a  Bifhop  in  England,     ^e  Place  of  his 
Refidence  (does  he  mean  thcCky  of  Burlington  ?)  and 
Manner  of  livings  jnuji  exceed  a  common  Clergyman* s 
in  Proportion  to  his  more  exalted  Station  in  the  Churchy 
p.  105.     If  £.  600  Sterling  laid  out  in  the  Purchafe 
of  a  Manfion-Houfe   and  Lands^  for   an  American 
Bifhop,  excites  in  the  Dodor  the  Idea  of  Grandeur 
and  Magnificence,  it  will  probably  have  a  contrary 
Effefl  in  the  Minds  of  other  Perfons.     There  are 
feveral  Inftances  in  America  of  Manfwn-Houfes  and 
Lands,  or,  in  other  Words,  of  Parfonag'e  Houfes 
and    Glebes,  which   could  not  be  purchafed    for 
twice  the  Sum  ;  and  I  believe  that  there  are  but 
few  epifcopal  Palaces  in  England,  even  exclufive  of 
their  Regalia'^,  the  Coil  of  which  has  not  exceeded 
it.  So  that  it  does  not  follow  from  the  above  Intel- 
ligence,   that  with  Refped  to  the  Article  of  hi$ 
Manjion-Houfe,  the  American  Bifliop  is  likely  to  ap- 
pear in  all  the  Grandeur  of  a  Bijhop  in  England,  or 
vaftly  to  exceed  in  Appearance  fome  common  Cler- 
gymen, Perhaps  the  intended  Grandeur  of  the  Ame- 
rican Bifhops  is  infered,  from  the  large  Sums  that 
have  been  given  for  their  Support.     But  until  it  be 
known  how  many  Bifhops  are  to  be  thereby  fup- 
ported,  and  how  rrtiich  each  is  to  receive,  the  Infe- 
rence is  not  conclufive. 

After  all,  why  fhould  not  a  Bifhop  be  fup- 
ported,  in  Proportion  to  his  more  exalted  Station  in 
the  Church  ?    Is  it  not  agreeable  to  the  common 

Y  Senfe 

*  Sec  the  American  Whigy  Nuiub.  I. 


j62  THEAPPEAL 

Sbct.  Senfe  of  Mankind,  and  to  the  Fitnefs  of  Things 
that  Men  in  emment  Stations  ftould  be  enabled °to 
make  a  greater  external  Appearance,  than  others 
of  an  inferior  Degree  ?  Ougiit  not  every  Office  to 
be  relpefited  according  to  its  Dignity  and  Impor- 
tance ?  And  IS  not  the  general  Temper  and  Difpo- 
fition  of  Mankind  ftich,  that  Refpeft  will  be  paid  to 
an  Office,  in  feme  Degree  of  Proportion  to  its  out- 
ward tigure  and  Appendages  ?  And  is  not  this  in 
Keality  the  Cafe,  with  Refpeft  to  ecclefiaftical  Offices 
as  well  as  to  any  other  ?  It  ought  farther  to  be  con- 
fidered,  that  the  neceffary  Expences  of  a  Biffiop 
greatly  exceed  thofe  of  a  common  Clergyman  A 
Bifliop  ougiit,  in  a  peculiar  Manner,  to  be  "  given 

'^^°%'\r '.'^•"  ^^  ^"g'^^  eminently  to  diftin- 
guifti  himfelf  by  Works  of  Charity.  Thefe  Things 
will  certainly  be  expefted  from  him  ;  and  how  can 
luch  Jixpedations  be  anfwered,  unlefs  a  more  am- 
ple Provifion  be  made  for  him,  than  is  requifite 
lor  common  Clergymen  ? 

rrr^V7  "^"^^  ■S'^o/'^  wm  mknowti  in  the  Chrillian 
World,    in  its  firft  Days  of  Purity.      This  is  not 
difputed,  with  Regard  to  their  external  Circum- 
Itances ;  and  the  fame  may  be  faid  of  the  Clergv 
in  general    In  thofe  Days  there  was  perhaps  not  tn 
Inftance,^<)f  a  Clergyman  fo  comfortably  fituated 
and  fo  well  accommodated,  as  I  fuppofe  Dr.  Chauncy 
to  b;  mBofton.  Now  what  are  we  to  infer  from  this  ? 
That  the  Doftor's  Parilhioners  have  done  wrong 
in  providing  for  him  fuch  un-primitive  Accommo- 
dations .?  Or,  that  he  does  wrong  in  accepting,  and 
making  Ule  of  them  ?  Can  it  be  thoughfthe  Dutv 
of  Biffiops  and  Clergymen,  at  this  Day,  to  court 
•  d-?Pf^  ^"^  Imprifonments,"  becaule  they  were 
inflided  Oh  the  Apoftles  and  firft  Minifters  of  the 

Chriftian 


DEFENDED.  i6 


3 


Chriftian  Religion  ?    Or  is  it  the  Duty  only  of  Bi-  Sect. 
fhops,  and  not  of  the  common  Clergy  and  private     ^* 
Chriflians,  to  be  in  thefe  primitive  Circuir fiances  ? 
One  would  be  apt  to.  infer  this,  from  fone  Men's 
Reafonings  -,    fo  glaring  is  their  Partiality   againfl 
the  epifcopal  Order.     Julian  the  Apoftate,  as  was 
obferved  to  the  fame  Purpofe  by  Archbifhop  Whit- 
gift^  in  Excufe  for  fome  of  the  Arts  he  had  iifed  to 
undermine  and  deftroy  Chriftianity,  "  faid  in  De- 
*'  rifion,  he  did  that  which  was  moft  meet  and  pro- 
^^  fitable  for  Chriflians,  viz.  That  they  being  made 
*'  poor,  might  foon.er  come  to  the  Kingdom  of 
"  Heaven  :  Seeing  the  Gofpel  promifeth  the  King-. 
''  dom  of  Heaven  to  thofe  that  be  poor,  and  that 
*'  Chrift  faith,  that  none  can  be  his  Diicples,  un- 
^'  lefs  they  forfake  all,  and  follow  him*."  I  do  not 
accufe  the  Do(5lor,  of  having  the  fame  inveterate 
Enmity  againfl  our  Bifhops^  tnat  Julian  had  againft 
Chriflians  in  general ;  but  in  fome   Appearances, 
there  is  a  flriking  Refemblance.     And  in  Confide- 
ration  of  that  Example,  it  may  aot  be  amifs  in  him 
to  examine,  whether  what  he  has  offered  in  the  like 
Strain,  be  not  the  Didlate  of  Prejudice  or  fome  evil 
PafTion,  rather  than  of  real  and  impartial  Jucigmieiit. 

I  KNOW  very  well  that  the  Gofpel  requires  of 
Bifhops,  and  it  as  indifpenfably  requires'  of  all  o- 
thers,  not  to  hold  Houfe^,  or  Lands,  or  any  v/orld- 
ly  Enjoyments  when  they  come  into  Competition^ 
with  a  good  Confcience  :  And  every  Bilhop  who. 
does  not  choofe  to  part  with  them,  rather  than  ta 
deny,  or  forfake,  or  difobey  Chrijl,  is  utterly  un^ 
worthy  of  the  venerable  Chara6ler.  But  the  Gofpel 
requires  not  of  itsDifciples,  not  even  of  Bifhops,  • 
to  renounce    the  temperate  Enjoyment  of   thefe 

*   Strypeh  Life  of  Whit  gift  y  pr  2I5« 


i64  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  Things,  excepting  when  particular  Reafons  make 
^*  it  necefTary.  It  allows  us  to  pofTefs  "  this  World's 
''  Goods,"  when  they  can  be  obtained  honeftly  •, 
it  teaches  us  to  confider  them  as  the  Gifts  of  Hea- 
ven, and  to  be  thankful  for  them  on  that  Account, 
cautioning  us  only  fo  to  ufe^  as  not  to  abufe^  them. 
And  what  it  makes  a  Rule  for  any,  it  injoins  upon 
all  Men,  without  any  Diftindion  of  Perfons  or 
Charaders. 

NOR  do  we  read  offuch  Bijhops^  fays  the  Dodor, 
until  Cbriftians  had  grojsly  departed  from  that  Simpli- 
city of  livings  which  was  their  primitive  Glory.  In 
a  State  of  Perfecution,  nothing  more  than  what  is 
here  called  Simplicity  of  livings  can  be  expected ; 
and  where  it  is  fubmitted  to  for  the  Sake  of  a  good 
Confcience,  as  it  was  by  the  primitive  Chrillians, 
it  is  undoubtedly  JMen's  Glory,  That  Chriftians,  in 
general,  in  this  Age,  have  too  far  departed  from  a 
decent  Simplicity  of  Manriers,  and  are  too  apt  to 
indulge  themfeives  in  excelTive  Luxury,  is  not  to 
be  denied,  and  ought  to  be  lamented.  All  Orders 
of  Men  feem  to  be  infeded  with  this  epidemical 
Evil,  and  it  is  to  be  feared,  even  that  the  Bi£hop§ 
and  Clergy  have  not  altogether  efcaped  the  Infec- 
tion •,  and  they,  in  particular,  ought  to  make  it 
their  Study  to  recover  themfeives,  and  all  whom 
they  can  perfuade.  Buf'  that  Nations  now  ought 
ftriclly  to  regulate  their  Manners  and  Mode  of 
iiving,  by  the  Cuftoms  of  any  former  Age,  I  do 
not  believe  ;  and  if  Individuals  fhould  attempt  it, 
it  would  anfwer  no  good  End,  and  they  would 
appear  ridiculous.  The  primitive  Chriftians,  for 
Initance,  had  no  Glafs-Windows  in  their  Houfes  ; 
and  we  are  under  as  ftrong  Obligations  to  adopt 
their  Simplicity  of  Living  in  this  Refpe6l;»  as  in  many 

^  others* 


CECT* 


DEFENDED.  165 

others.  The  Bifhops  in  the  primitive  Church  were 
very  differently  fituated,  from  what  Bifhops  now  ^• 
are  in  the  Church  of  England  ;  but  it  does  not  ap- 
pear, that,  in  Cafe  the  civil  Powers  had  been  dif- 
pofed  to  beftow  upon  them  the  like  Favours,  with 
thofe  which  are  enjoyed  by  our  Bifhops,  that  they 
would  have  been  unwilling  to  accept  them.  On 
the  other  Hand,  it  does  appear,  from  repeated 
Trials,  that  many  of  our  Bifhops  have  been  as 
ready  to  give  up,  and  facrifice,  all  their  worldly 
Advantages,  when  their  Duty  required  it,  as  any 
Bifhops  in   the  primitive  Church. 

Al"  fo  great  a  Diftance  from  apofiolic  Tmes,  fays 
the  Dodor,  as  the  third  Century^  thd"  Corruption  had 
then  crept  into  the  Churchy  Paul  of  Samofata,  Bifhop 
^/Antioch,  was  depofed^  ajnong  other  Things  for  thiSj 
that  having  been  poor  before  he  was  a  Bifhop, 
he  had  after  that  grown  veiy  rich,  born  fecular 
Dignities,    paifed  the  Streets  with  a    Train  of 
Attendants,  and  erefted  to  himfelf  a  magnificent 
Seat  in  the   Church." — For  which  Eufehius  is 
quoted,  p.    105.     The  Epiflle  of  the  Council  of 
Antioch,    partly  given  by    Eiifebiiis^  in   the  Place 
refered  to,  does  not  fay  that  Faul  v/as    depofed, 
among  other  Things,  for  having  been  very  rich  ; 
but  it  charges  him  with  having  amaffed  incredible 
Wealth  unjuftly^  by  Opprdfion  and  Sacrilege.    For 
want  of  Greek  Types,  I  muil  produce  to  the  Rea- 
der the  Latin  Tranflation  by  Valefius^  "  Nunc  ai 
incredibilem  Opulentiam  pervenit^  per   Scelera  ac 
Sacrilegia^  Fratrumque  ConciiJJiones :  dum  Injuria 
affeSios  decipit^  promittens  quidein  fefe  illis  accept  a 
*'  mercede  Of  em  laturum  :  fallens  autem  ipfos^  et  ex 
*'  Facilitate  litigantium,    qui  ut  negotio  liberentur^ 
^  quidvis  dare  paraH  funty  Lucrum  inaniter  captans^ 

''  et 


i66  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  «  gt  Pietdtem  ^^eftum  ejje  exijlimans.''^    The  Com- 
^*      plaint  goes  on  Ipecifying,  not  barely  that  he  had 
iorn  fecular  Dignities^  but  that  he   had  born  them 
with  unbounded  Pride   and  Infolence :  "  Neque 
"  quod  Faftu  et  Arrogantia  fupra  Modum  elatus 
"  fasculares  gerit  Dignitates" — not  fimply  that  he 
had  pajfed  the  Streets  with  a  Train  of  Attendants^ 
but  that  in  thus  pafling  the  Streets,  he  had  difco- 
vered  unfufFerable  Arrogance  and  Difdain,  to  the 
Difgrace  of  the  Chriftian  Religion  : — "  Stipatufque 
''  maxima  Hominum  Multitudine,  partim  pr^eun- 
*'  tium,  partim  fubfequentium  •,  adeo  ut  illius  Faftu 
"  etArrogantiaincredibilisInvidiaodiumquemulto- 
"  rum  adverfus  Fidem  noftram  conflatum  fit/*   In 
Ihort,  he  is  here  reprefented  by  the  Council,  to  have 
been  the  greateft  Monfter  for  Wickednels,  that  ever 
difgraced  the  Chriftian  Church  ;  and  I  am  very  cer- 
tain, that  a  Biftiop  of  his  Character  in  the  Church  of 
England^zt  this  Day, would  not  be  punifhedwith lefs 
Severity,  than  this  Biftiop  was  in  the  Third  Century. 
Nor  do  I  believe  that  the  Council  of  y:/;^//^rZ?  condemn- 
ed any  Thing  in  his  Chara61;er  or  Condu61:,  but  what 
would  be  as  loudly  condemned  in  an  Englijh  Convoca- 
tion.  It  is  evident  therefore,  upon  the  whole,  that 
this  Inftance  will  not  anfwer  the  Purpofe  for  which 
it  is  quoted. 

Th^  Do(5lor  proceeds  :  A  good  while  after  this^ 
though  the  Church  had  grown  ftill  more  corrupt  the 
Fourth  Council  of  Carthage  decreed^  "  That  the 
".  Bifliop  ftiall  have  a  little  Dwelling-Houfe  near 
"  the  Church;  that  he  ftiall  have  coarfe  houfe-hold 
"  Stuff"  and  Diet, '  and  feek  his  Reputation  only  by 
"  found  Dodrine,  and  a  good  Life  ;  that  he  ftiall 
"  not  fpend  his  Time  in  caring  for  his  Family, 

but  be  employed  wholly  in  reading,  praying  and 

"  preaching 


(( 


DEFENDED.  167 

1^  preaching  the  Word  of  God,"   p.  106.     Some  Sect. 

^  A  ^l^£^^^^  ^^  ^^^^  decreed,  is  very  commendable.      ^• 
,  A   Biihop    ought  undoubtedly   to  apply    himfelf 
chiefly  to   the  proper  Duties  of  his  Fundion.     He 
ought  to  avoid  every  Appearance  of  a  vain  Extra- 
vagance, and  of  an  undue  Attachment  to  the  Plea- 
lures,  the  Honours,  and  Interefts  of  the  World 
But  that   he  Ihould   literally  be  confined  to  mean 
Diet,  coarfe  Furniture,  and  afmall  Houfe,  if  Piety 
or  Generofity  have  provided  for  him   better,  no  ^ 

unbiased  Perfon    can  think    neceiTary.      And  fo 
again,  if  he  is  to  have  no  Regard   at  all  to    the 
V^elfare  and  Interefts  of  his  Family,  he  muft  adt 
an  unnatural  Part,  and  become,  according  to  the 
Apoftle's  Eftimation,    "  worfe  than   an  Infidel  " 
^or  IS  It  neceffary,  that  he  fhould  never  concern 
himfelf  m  pubjick  Affairs,  as,  of  late,  we   have 
een  u  frequently  afferted.     "  Muft  a  Perfon  who 
^  knows  well  the  Intereft   of  his  Country,  and  is 
capable  of  ferving  it,  be  filent  only  becaufe  he 
IS  a  Mmifter   (or  a  BiJIoop  ?)  Is  he  nothing  elfe  ? 
Is  he  not  a  Subjediof  his  Prince,  and  a  Member 
^  ot  the  Common-wealth  ?-— Mr.  Colman  was  full 
ot  the  Sentiments  of  the  Rev.  Dodors  Increafe 
^  and  Cotton  Mather,  his  Paftors  and  Predeceftbrs, 
^  on  this  Head— viz.  That  Opportunities    to   do 
^  good^not  only    legitimate  the  Applicatioii  of 
our  Capacities  to  do  it,    but  alfo  oblio-e   and 
,  require  us  to  do  it.     That   upon  publick  and     ' 
^  preffing  Emergencies,  Minifters  may  apply  their 
^  iuperior  Talents  to  fome  Things  of  fecular  Im- 
^  portance.     The  great  Selden  is  quoted  by  them 
,  jn  Vindication  of  fuch  a  Pradice,— 'Tis  a  foolifh 
1  l^ing   (fays  he)   to   fay,  a  Minifter  muft  not 
meddk  with  fecular  Matters  becaufe   his   own 
rroteffion  will  take   up  his  whole  Man.     The 

"  Meaning 


^68  THE   APPEAL 

Sect.  «  Meaning  is  only,  that  he  muft  attend  his  Cal- 
^'  "  hng"  *.  If  the  Council  of  Carthage  intended 
thofe  Decrees  fhould  be  underftood  literally,  allow- 
ing of  no  Exceptions  from  the  general  Rule,  they 
contradicted  the  Senfe  of  Councils  in  purer  Times, 
before  the  Church  had  grown  fo  corrupt.  Such  In- 
jun6lions  favor  not  fo  much  of  Piety,  as  of  Barba- 
rifm  and  Monkery,  into  which  the  Church  now 
was  beginning  to  degenerate,  and  with  which  this 
very  Council  appears,  from  other  Evidence,  to  have 
been  infedied.  ^  For  "  in  the  4th  Council  of  Car- 
**  thage,  there  are  three  Canons  immediately  fol- 
"  lowing  one  another  to  this  Purpofe,  that  they 
**  (the  inferior  Clergy)  fhould  provide  themfelves 
*'  with  Food  and  Raiment  at  fome  honeft  Trade  or 
^'  Husbandry,  without  hindering  the  Duties  of  their 
"  Office  in  the  Church  -,  and  fuch  of  them  as  were 
"  able  to  labour,  fhould  be  taught  fome  Trade  and 
^*  Letters  together.  And  the  Laws  of  the  State 
*'  were  fo  far  from  hindering  this,  that  they  en- 
"  couraged  fuch  of  the  Clergy  to  follow  an  honeft 
"  Calling,  by  granting  them  a  fpecial  Immunity 
^'  from  the  Chryfargyrum^  or  luftral  Tax,  which 
'^  was  exadied  of  all  other  Tradefmcn.-f"  It  is 
evident  from  hence,  that  this  Council  had  run  far 
into  an  Extreme  with  Regard  to  the  Clergy  in  gene- 
■  ral,  as  well  as  to  Bifhops  -,  fo  that  no  Example  or 
Inftrudiion  taken  from  thence,  can  be  of  much 
Weight  in  any  modern  Controverfy.  If  the  Canons 
of  this  Council  relating  to  Bifhops  ought  to  be  re- 
garded, why  not  as  well  thofe  that  relate  to  the 
inferior  Clergy  ?  If  thefe  are  to  be  a  Rule  for  the 
Clergy  of  thisDay,  why  does  not  the  Do6i:or  become 
a  Mechanick,  and  pradice  fome  Trade   himfelf  ? 

Or, 

*  Turell's  Life  ofDr.  B.  Coleman,  p.  79. 
t  Bingham's  Ecclefiafikal Antiquities^  Book  Vl.Cap.  4.  Sefl.  13. 


DEFENDED.  169 

Or,  if  his  Age  exempts  him  from  the  Duty  of  Sect* 
bodily  Labor,  why  does  he  riot  exhort  thofe  of  his 
Brethren  who  are  in  fiill  Vigor  and  Strength,  and 
efpecially  all  young  Candidates  for  the  Miniftryj 
^efpe6tively  to  regulate  and  qualify  themfelves,  ac- 
cording to  this  African  Standard  ? 

The  Extra<5ls  {fbn\  Cranmer  and  Hooper^  v/itH 
^hich  we  are  next  prefented,  if  properly  under- 
ilood,  are  not  inconfiftent  with  any  Thing  for 
which  we  contend.  PafTages  of  this  Kind  are  not 
to  be  interpreted  figorouOy^  but  according  to  the 
known  Sentiments  of  the  Authors  :  And  it  is  well 
known  that  thofe  great  Reformers  obje6led  not  a- 
gainil  Bifhops  being  fupported,  agreeably  to  their 
Rank  and  Dignity  in  the  Church:  Alen  are  too 
ready^  as  the  Do<51or  obferves,  //  they  are  much 
raifed  above  others  in  worldly  Circumftances^  to  grovj 
big  in  their  own  Apprehenjions^  to  be  haughty  and 
imperious ;  treating  thofe  below  them  with  Infolence 
and  Contempt^  p.  108.  This  general  Proportion  is 
imqueftionably  true,  but  what  Inference  are  we  to 
make  from  it  ?  Not,-  that  all  Men  fhould  be  re- 
duced to  the  fame  LeveL  but  that  thofe  Perfons 
who  are  thus  fituated  ihould  be  fenfible  of  this 
Danger,  and  guard  againil  it.  Affluence  and  Power^ 
if  they  fall  into  the  Hands  of  ill-difpofed  Perfons, 
are  dangerous  Things— dangerous  to  the  PoifeiTors, 
and  dangerous  to  Society  ;  but  they  are  in  both 
Refpe6ls  ufeful^  when  they  meet  with  a  Difpofition 
to  employ  them  for  the  Benefit  of  Mankind.  As  I 
hope  and  believe  the  Majority  .of  protefbant  Bifhops 
and  Clergymen,  of  every  Denomination,  have  fuch 
a  Difpofition  5  /  am  free  to  declare  it  my  hearty 
V/ifld^  (and  why  may  not  I  wilh,  as  well  as  the 
OodoF?)  10  fee  in  general,  efpecially  the  worthy 

Z  Part 


lyo  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  Part  of  them,  well  fupported,  /.  e,  much  better 
^*  fupported  than  they  commonly  are  in  this  Coun- 
try. /  wijh  this,  not  only  in  Regard  of  the  epifeopal 
Clergy^  hut  the  Clergy  of  every  Denomination  on  the 
Continent  •,  yea^  the  whole  Chrijiian  WorlL  And 
in  particular  with  Refped  to  every  American  Bi- 
Ihop  that  fhall  be  hereafter  appointed,  although  I 
think  it  unneceflary  that  he  fhould  appear  in  all 
the  Grandeur  of  a  Bifhop  in  England.  I  am  ready  to 
confefs,  that  I  fhould  not  be  forry  to  fee  his  Place  of 
Re/tdence  and  Manner*  of  Living,  exceed  a  common 
Clergyman's,  in  fome  due  Proportion  to  his  much. 
more  exalted  Station  in  the  Church. 


■<a 


/ITv /?\ /«% /0% 


S  £  C  T, 


DEFENDED.  171 

S  E  C  T  I  O  N     VI. 

WHEN  the  Appeal  to  the  Public  was  drawn  Sect 
up,  It  was  apprehended  that  the  Time  was     VI. ' 
pecuharly  favourable  to  an  Application  for  an  Ame- 
rican Epifcopate  j  the  Reafons  for  which  Appre- 
henfion  were  affigned  and  explained  in  S^ct,  VI, 
and  are  as  follow :  '  The  Tumults  of  War  have  . 
'  ceafed,  and  the  public  Tranquility  is   reftored,  %^. 
without  any  rcafonable  fufpicions  of  a  fpeedy  In-     'V 
terruption-— the  greateft  Harmony  fublifls  be- 
tween our  Mother-Country  and  mofl  of  the  Co- 
lonies—the Plan  of  an  American  Epifcopate  has 
been  previoufly  fettled  and   adjufted  in  fuch  a 
Manner,    that  the  religious   Privileges  of  none 
can  be  violated  or  endangered— and°  which  we 
fhould  ever  acknowledge  with  all  Thankfulnefs, 
we  ai-e,  at  this  Time,  fo  happy   as  to  have  a 
Prince  on  the  Throne,  from  whofe  moll  unquef- 
tionable  Difpofition   to  promote  the  general  In- 
terefts  of  Virtue  and  Religion,  from  whole  finccre 
Affediion  for  the  Church,  and  from  whofe  mofl 
gracious  Declarations  on  the  Subjed:  before  us, 
we  cannot  poflibly  doubt  of  the  Royal  Appro- 
bation and  Concurrence.* 

It  is  the  Bufinefs  of  an  Anf^erer  to  Iliew, 
that  thefe  Circumftances  of  the  Public  were  not 
then  real,  but  imaginary  j  or  that  they  were  not,  in 
Reafon,  to  be  looked  upon  as  favorable  to  fuch 
an  Application,  or  elfe  candidly  to  confefs  the 
Force  and  Propriety  of  the  Reprefentation.  Dr. 

Chauncy 


ijt  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

$ECT.  Qhauncy  thinks  fit  to  difpute  the  Reality  of  thofe 
^^'  favourable  Appearances,  in  the  Senfe  wherein  it  i3 
maintained  in  the  Appeal,  He  (joes  not  indee4 
deny  that  the  Tumults  of  War  were  then  ceafed, 
but'ihrewdly  aO-is^  ivas  tlpis  never  the  Cafe  before  ? 
This  Quellion  alludes  to  the  introduftory  Obfer- 
vation,  '  that  the  favourable  Opportunity — was 
'  fuch,  in  federal  Refpefts,  as  the  Civcumftances 

♦  of  the  Nation  had  never,  until  then,  afforded.' 
But  it  "was  no|:  pretended  that  the  Temple  of  the 
Britifh  Janus  had  never  been  before  fhut,  nor  that 
the  favourable  Opportiinity  was,  in  every  Refpe^t, 
without  a  Precedent.  Pie  goes  on  :  Are  there  no  rea^. 
fonable  Siifptcions  of  a  ffeeiy  Interruption  of  the.  \ 
trefent  'Tranquility  ?  The  Queflion,  ought  not  tq 
have  been  put  in  the  prefent  Tenfe,  The  Appeal  wa^ 
drawn  yp  in  February  1767,  arid  the  Doctor  wrote 
in  the  Beginning  of  1768,  it  being  about  a  Year 
afterwards ;  within  which  Time  the  Appearance  of 
public  Affairs  was  greatly  changed.  And  I  can  al- 
fure  him,  that^  whatever  Alarms  of  a  French  or 
Spanifh  War  had  reached  him  and  impreffed  his 
Imagination  at  the  Time  of  anfwering^  I  neither 
faw  nor  heard  of  any  Appearances  of  fuch  a  Thing 
at  the  Time  of  writing.     With  Regard  to  the 

^  Harmony  fuhfifting  between  our  Mother-Coun- 

*  try  and  mofl:  of  the  Colonies,'  the  Doftor  fays  : 
//  is  true  the  Difpute  relative  to  the  Stamp-Act^ 
Jbas  been  happily  terminated.  But  has  nothing  inter- 
vened fince-,  that  has  difiurbed  the  Harmony  ?  If  he 
will  be  pleafed  to  review  the  Chronology  of  the^ 
doings  at  Home  which  relate  to  the  Colonies^  he  will 
find  that  in  the  Beginning  of  1767,  we  knew  here 
of  nothing  that  had  intervened,  after  the  happy  Ter- 
mination of  the  greatDifpute  about  the  St  amp- Act, 
which  had  the  kail  Tendency  to  diiturb  our  Har- 
mony, 


DEFENDED.  173 

mony.  Indeed  before  the  Appeal  was  printed,  it  Sect. 
was  found  that  the  Mother-Country  had  exprefTed  ^ 
her  Refentment  of  the  Proceedings  of  one  of  our 
provincial  AlTemblies  •,  and  this  occafioned  a  fmall 
Alteration  to  be  made  in  the  Copy,  moft  of  the  Co^ 
lonies  being  inferted,  inftead  of,  the  Colonies.  The 
Do6lor  has  fome  Declamation  iinder  this  Queflion, 
which  as  it  is  fovinded  on  ;^  Miftake,  I  car^  readily 
^xcufe. 

As  to  the  Plan  for  American  Bifhops,  according 
to  which  phe  religious  Privileges  of  all  Denominati- 
ons are  to  be  left  untouched,  the  Dodior  has  the 
Curiofity  to  jnquire  :  By  whom  has  this  Plan  been 
fettled  and  adjufted  ?  And  then  adds,  we  have  no 
good  Reafon  to  think  that  it  has  been  done  by  thofe 
who  have  any  conftitutional  Right  to  meddle^  of  their 
cwn  meer  Motion^  with  Matters  of  this  Nature. 
This  Subjeft  will  come  more  properly  under  Con- 
fideration  afterwards ;  in  the  mean  while,  I  will 
give  him  this  general  Information,  that  the  Plan 
for  fuch  an  Epifcopate  as  js  explained  in  the  Ap- 
peal^ was  fettled  by  thofe  who  were  warranted  by  a 
Royal  ComrniiTion  conftkytionally  iffued. 

As  to  the  King's  favorable  Difpofition,  from 
which  we  have  fuch  Expe6lations  of  Relief,  the 
Po6lor  thinks  it  will  do  us  no  Service.  We  can^ 
fays  he,  ch  ear  fully  rely  on  the  impartial  Juftice  and 
Gocdnefs  of  the  Britifh  Sovereign^  7iot  in  the  lenft 
^Quhting  his  equal  paternal  Regard  to  all  his  lo'^'al 
Colonifts  of  whatever  Clafs.  And  may  not  tfie  Mem- 
bers of  the  Church  of  England  rely  upon  him,  as 
well  as  others  ?  "Will  impartial  Juftice  and  Good- 
nefs  be  partial  againft  the  Church  ?  Will  not  the 
e^ual  Regard  of  our  Sovereign,  at  length  raife  us 

to 


THE    APPEAL 


Sfct. 


to  that  Equality  with  our  Fellow-Colonifls,  which 
^^*  alone  we  requeft  ?  Will  not  a  paternal  Regard  to 
loyal  Colonifis  raife  thofe  Colonilrs,  whole  Loyalty- 
has  been  unimpeached,  and  which  it  is  hoped  will 
be  able  to  ftand  every  Trial,  from  the  Condition 
of  Aliens  into  that  of  Sons  ?  How  unkind  and  un« 
generous  is  it  to  tell  us  of  our  Equality^  when  the 
World  fees  that  our  Condition  is  cruelly  unequal ! 
As  the  Concurrence  of  many  peculiar  Circum- 
fiances  was  apprehended  to  be  favorable  to  the 
Scheme  of  an  Epifcopate  in  the  Colonies,  fo  it  was 
obferved  in  the  Appeal^  ^  that  the  Arguments  for 
^  fending  Bilhops  to  America^  were  never  fo  ftrong 
'  and  forcible  as  they  are  at  prefent.'  Under  this 
Head,  the  Number  of  thofe  who  belong  to  the  u4r 
merican  Church  of  England^  and  who  will  receive 
Benefit  from  this  Appointment,  was  particularly 
infiftcd  on.  This  Number  was  intimated  to  be 
NEAR  A  Million,  The  Writers  againft  the  Ap- 
peal^ particularly  Dr.  Chauncy  and  the  Qentinel^  have 
exerted  themfelves  to  prove,  that  the  Account  is 
aorai'avated  bevond  the  Bounds  of  Truth  and  Pro- 
bability  •,  and,  in  my  private  Opinion,  the  moft 
plaufible  Things  that  have  been  written  againfl: 
any  Part  of  the  Appeal^  have  been  offered  on  this 
Subjej^.  It  may  therefore  be  proper  to  lay  before 
the  Reader  the  Evidence  upon  which  the  ExprefTion 
was  ground^. 

If  any  one  wdll  take  the  Trouble  to  turn  to  tl^ic 
Appeal^  p.  ^^^  he  will  find,  that  any  exa6t  Cer- 
tainty as  to  the  Number  of  Church-Men  in  America 
was  not  pretended  to  •,  fo  far  from  it,  that  it  was 
exprcfsly  acknowledged,  '  that  in  a  Country  fo 
■*-  v;idely  extended  and  unequally  peopled,'  it  was  not 
to  be  expeded.  However,  as  it  had  been  frequent- 


DEFENDED.  175 

ly  faid  by  our  moil  fenfible  Writers,  and  was  report-  Sect* 
cd  to  have  been  afTumed  as  Fadl  in  the  Parliament 
of  Great  Britain^  that  the  King's  proper  Subjcd:s 
m  America  2imoux\ttd  to  three  Millions-,  it  was 
thought  that  the  Aflertion,  '  that  the  Church  of 

*  England  in  Aanerica  contains  now  near  a  Million 

*  of  Members,'  might  be  juilified  on  the  Ground  of 
that  general  Aflumption.  At  the  Time  of  writings 
I  had  Reafon  to  believe,  and  am  flill  of  Opinion, 
that  thofe  who  profefs  themfelves  to  belong  to  the 
Church  of  England  in  the  American  Colonies  and 
I  (lands,  are  not  lefs  than  a  third  Part  of  the  Inha- 
bitants, exclufively  of  the  Blacks  ;  and  I  had  Arith-- 
metic  enough  to  know,  that  a  third  Part  of  what 
was  afligned  as  the  whole  Number,  was  one  Million, 
But  as  I  fufpedted  that  the  general  Number  was 
exaggerated,  an  Abatement  was  made  on  the  Side 
of  the  Church,  and  it  was  intimated  that  the  Mem- 
bers of  it  amounted,  not  to  a  full  Million,  but  to 
near  a  Million,  Now  this,  I  imagine,  mio-ht  be 
faid,  not  improperly,  after  a  Deduction  of  500,000,, 
from  the  Sum  total  as  currently  received,  a  third 
Part  of  which  would  be  upwards  of  833,000: 
And  this  was  adlually  the  very  Number  that  I 
had  in  Viev/.  And  w^herever  the  ExprefTion  of 
near  a  Million  has  been  applied  to  the  Number  of 
American  Church-Men^  by  the  Clergy  of  our  Con- 
vention, it  has  been  upon  the  fame  View  and 
Principle. 

My  continuing  to  ufe  the  ExprefTion,  after  hav-^ 
ing  feen  the  Account  of  an  a6tual  Survey  faid  to 
have  been  made  in  1762,  v/hich  was  mentioned  in 
the  Appeal^  p.  e,6^  remains  to  be  accounted  for. 
The  Number  of  Inhabitants  expreffed  in  that  Ac- 
^^unt,  of  which  I  knew  no  more  than  that  a  Gen- 
tleman 


175  TMEAPPgAL 

Sect,  tlemaii  of  Credit  told  me  it  had  been  carefully 
•^*  taken,  fell  ;fhort  of  rtiy  Expe6latk)ns,  it  making 
the  Members  of  the  Church,  not  including  the 
Blacks^  to  be  no  moi*c  at  the  Time  of  the  Survey,^ 
than  between  Four  and  Five  Hundred  Thoufand.- 
But  then  it  was  confidered,  that  the  Americans  are" 
,  found  to  double  their  Numbers  in  25  Years  in  the' 
Courfe  of  natural  Generation — that  five  Years  had 
elapfed  fmce  the  Survey  was  faid  to  have  beert 
made,  and  confequeritly  that  a  fifth  Part  of  the 
whole  was  to  be  added  to  the  Number,  that  the 
Account  included  not  the  Colonies  lately  ceded,  in 
which  there  ar6  probably  fome  Tkoufands  of 
Church-Men— -that  a  farther  yearly  Addition  had 
been  made  by  the  coming  over  of  Europeans^  and, 
as  fome  thinks  by  Frofelytes  frorii  the  Diflenters 
— and  that  of  the  Blacks^  not  Itii  than  600,00a 
muft  be  the  Propeity  of  Epifcopalians,  of  which 
Number  it  was  conje6i:ured  that  about  a  fourth 
Part  mjght  be  faid  properly  to  belong  to  the 
Church  :  1  fay,  the  above  Particulars  being  confi- 
dered, I  was  of  Opinion  that  the  Exprefiiofi  of 
Hear  a  Million^  might  ftill  be  retained,  confiftently 
^  V      with  the  Account  of  the  aflual  Survey; 

S  o  ]v^  E  of  my  Opponents  hare  affecled  to  ht 
witty  upon  what  v/as  faid  of  the  Blacks,  ridiculing 
the  Notion  of  their  being  Members  of  the  Church. 
But,  v/iih  Regard  to  the  AdmifTion  of  Members,^ 
the  Church  of  England^  like  the  Gofpel  of  Chrift, 
m.akes   no  DiftincSion  of  Jew  ox  Greeks  Bond  or   j 
Free,  Black  or  White  ;  and  we  are  not  aihamed  to  1 
Gonfefs,  that   many  of  thofe  w^ho  are  doomed  ta  % 
Slavery,  and  upon  whofe  Necks  we  have  faflened 
the  Yoke  of  Bondage,  are  Members  of  the  fame 
religious  Society  with  ourfelves.    Dr.  Chmincy  fays 

of 


DEFENDED*  177 

of  me,  in  a  Note^  p.  112,  the  Br,  for  Reafons  heft  Sect. 
known  to  himfelf  did  not  chufe  to  fay^  in  plain 
V/ords^  that  Negroes,  knowing  nothing  of  Religion y 
'iliake  a  very  large  Part  of  his  Million  of  the  Mem- 
bers of  the  Church  of  England.  But  it  is  evident  he 
has  thefe  in  Referve  to  fave  the  Truth  of  his  Affir- 
mation, As  I  did  not  fay  in  -plain  Words,,  neither 
did  I  give  the  leaft  Intimation,  that  Negroes,,  know^ 
t7ig  nothing  of  Religion,,  conflituted  any  Part  of 
the  fuppofed  Number  of  American  Church-Men* 
If  I  had  intended  to  include  flich,  I  iliould  not 
have  fpoken  of  yjear  a  Million^  but  of  fnany  more 
than  a  Million^  belonging  to  the  Church.  Al- 
though I  had  obferved,  in  p.  57,  of  the  Slaves  in 
general,  that  '  they  may  be  (aid  in  an  imperfetl 
'  Senfe,  to  belong  to  the  refpe6live  religious 
'  Clafles  of  their  Owners  -^  yet  I  meant  not  to  in- 
clude in  the  Account  of  near  a  Million,,  more  of 
them  than  were  fuppofed  to  have  been  adlually  ad- 
mitted, or  were  defirous  of  being  admitted,  to  be 
Members  of  the  Church  by  Baptifm  :  And  fuch,  it 
was  hoped,  might  amount  to  the  fourth  Part  of  the 
whole  Number. 

Thus  I  have. accounted  for  our  having  faid,  that 
the  Church  of  England  in  America  contains  near  a 
'•  Million  of  Members.  After  all,  I  am  not  pofitive 
but  we  may  have  fpoken  improperly ;  for  which 
Reafon,  for  my  own  Part,  I  fhall  be  contented 
hereafter  to  change  the  Mode  of  Expreilion,  and 
inftead  of  faying,  that  the  Church  of  England  in 
America  contains  near  a  Million  of  MeiTibers,  to 
fay  it  contains  a  third  Fart  of  all  the  Inhabitants  of 
the  Britifh  Iflands  and  Colonies  in  America^  without 
including  the  Blacks  ;  which  Expreflion,  I  believe, 
can  be  fairly  defended. 

A  a  The 


jyS  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  Th£  Dodtor,  in  Order  to  confute  the  Account 
^^*  given  in  the  Appeal^  is  pleafed  to  fpend  four  or  five 
Pages  in  Exhibitions  of  his  own  political  Arithme- 
tic ',  but  he  appears  not  to  be,  any  more  than  the 
Author  of  the  Appeal^  a  Brerewood  or  a  Petty. 
I  could  eafily  point  out  many  Miftakes  in  his  Cal- 
culations •,  but  I  find  it  neceflary  to  fpare  the  Rea- 
der's Patience  wherever  I  can.  The  Effedl  of  his 
Operations  is,  in  his  own  Opinion  of  the  Matter, 
that//  is  queftionable^  zvhether  the  Amount  of  epifco- 
pal  Profeffors^  in  all  thefe  Colo?iies  will  be  more  than 
about  270,000,  p.  115.  This  Computation,  I  am 
perfuaded,  w^ould  be  found  greatly  defedtive  upon 
a  flridl  Examination  •,  but  even  allowing  it  to  be 
juft,  the  Number  is  not  contemptibly  fmall.  For 
27O5O00  Members  of  the  national  Church  in  the 
America?!  Colonies,  are  too  many  to  be  negledled. 
If  any  other  Denomination  of  Proteflants  in  this 
Country,  confifling  of  but  a  tenth  Part  of  that 
Number,  were  to  be  refufed  the  Enjoyment  of  its 
ov/n  Form  of  ecclefiaftical  Government  and  Difci- 
pline,  I  doubt  not  but  it  would  occafion  a  general 
Clamor  throughout  the  Colonies,  and  perhaps 
throughout  the  whole  Britijh  Empire. 

The  deplorable  State  of  the  American  Slaves 
was  mentioned  in  the  Appeal^  and  it  was  repre- 
'  fented,  that  probably  the  propofedEpifcopate  would 
liave  a  gooa  EfFeft  upon  that  wretched  Clafs  of 
our  Fellow-Creatures,  for  whofe  fpiritual  Interefts 
w^e  are  under  peculiar  Obligations  to  be  follicitous. 
The  Dodtor  replies  :  Could  he  have  hit  upon  nothing 
hut  an  Epifcopate  for  their  Relief?  "This^  at  beft^ 
is  a  far -fetched^  round-about  Expedient^  p.  1 1 6.  I 
could  undoubtedly  have  hit  upon  fome  other  Ex- 
pedient's i  but  as  the  Cafe  of  an  Epifcopate  was 

under 


VI. 


DEFENDED.  179 

vmder  Confideration  when  thefe  Blacks  were  intro-  Sect. 
duced,  it  was  then  moft  natural  to  hit  upon  that. 
And  although  he  feems  to  think  the  Expedient 
far-fetched  and  round-ahoiit^  yet  any  one  may  fee 
that  I  did  not  go  far,  nor  much  out  of  my  Way,"to 
meet  with  it.  What  he  proceeds  to  fay  upon  the 
Subjedl  of  Slavery,  as  it  is  not  offered  in  Oppofi- 
tion  to  any  Thing  advanced  in  the  Appeal^  how- 
ever it  may  deferve  the  Confideration  of  the  Pub- 
lic, is  no  particular  Concern  of  mine,  and  therefore 
I  fhall  pals  it  over.    - 

It  w^as  reprefented  in  the  Appeal^  p.   ^%^  that 
*  another  Argument  for  granting  an  American  E- 
'  pifcopate,  arifes  from  the  Obligations  of  Grati- 
*-  tude;  a  national  Senfe  of  which,  ought,   at  this 
'  Time,  to  have  a  peculiar  Efficacy  in  Favor  of 
'  Religion  in  the  American  Plantations.'     It  is  no 
round-about ^  but  a  dired.  Courfe,  that  leads  to  this 
Inference.     '  For  the  divine  Goodnefs  having  been 
m.oft  eminently  difplayed  in  America^  where  can  it 
be  fo  proper  to  erect  fome  fuitable  Monument  of 
rehgious  Gratitude  for  this  Goodnefs,  as  in  Ameri- 
ca? What.  Method  of  doing  this  is  fo  natural,  as 
farther  to  fecure  and  extend  that  Religion,  whereby 
the  Honor  of  God  is  believed  to  be  beil  promo- 
ted ?  This  muft  be  the  Religion,  which  in  the  O- 
pinion  of  the  Nation,  is  the  bell  and  moil  pcrfed  •, 
or,  in  other  Words,  the  Religion  of  the  Church 
of  England.      But  what   does  the   State    of   the 
Church  of  England  in  America  require  to  be  done, 
for  its  W^elfare  and  Happinefs  ?  Why,  this  Church 
is,  in  a  Manner  perifhing  for  Want  of  common 
Neceflaries.     She  has  long  been  imploring  Relief, 
under  fuch  Difeafes  as  mull  prove  fatal  to  her,  if 
much  longer  negledled.  ^"^^p^t  therefore  earnellly  re- 

A  a  2  (juefcs. 


j8o  T  he    AP  PE  AL 

Sect,  quefls,  and  She  only  reqiiefls,  that  proper  Rcme- 
^  •  dies  may  be  provided  for  her  prefent  Sufferings. 
This  Requeft  is  made  with  full  Confidence  of  fuc- 
ceeding,  as  She  wifhes  for  nothing  that  fhall  be 
thought  inconiiftent  with  the  Rights  and  Safety  of 
others.  She  afks  for  nothing  but  what  has  been  granted 
to  others,  without  any  ill  Confequences  •,  and  Sho 
cannot  but  rely  on  the  common  Affedlion  and  Juf-. 
tice  of  the  Nation  to  raife  her  to  this  Equality.' 
This  is  the  Subilance  of  the  Argument  as  it  ftands 
in  the  Appeal 

The  Bodlor  pretends  that  he  cannot  eafily  dif- 
cern  any  fpecial  Conne^iojt  the  vicforious  Succefs  of 
the  Britijh  Arms  in  America  has^  with  the  Eftahlifh-r 
ment  of  an  Epifcopate  here.  But  this  Connexion 
has  been  clearly  pointed  out  •,  and  it  is  fufiicient  for 
my  Purpofe,  if  it  is  vifible  to  others.  Is  the  Reli- 
gion of  the  Church  of  England^  fays  he,  p.  119,  the 
only  true  Religion  on  the  Aynerican  Continent  ?  I  ihall 
not  now  enter  into  aDifquifition  about  t\\t  Number  oi 
true  Religions,  nor  how^  far  any  Thing  that  contra^ 
dicls  the  Truth  may  be  true  itfrif,  but  anfwer  di- 
redly  to  the  Queilion  :  The  Religion  of  the  Church 
of  England^  is  evidently  the  purefc  and  bed  /;/  the 
'  national  Opinion^  or  it  would  never  have  been  re- 
ceived as  fuch,  and  efiablillied  at  Hom.e.  But  is 
Religion^  in  7icne  of  the  ether  Fcrrns^  to  he  regarded  ? 
In  my  Judgm.ent  of  the  Matter,  Religion  under  e- 
very  Form  ought  to  be  regarded,  in  a  greater  or 
lefs  Degree,  as  perhaps  the  woril  Form  of  it  is 
better  than  none  at  all  \  and  under  all  Forms  it 
ought  to  be  tolerated,  as  far  as  is  confiflent  with 
the  public  Safety.  But  as  no  Man,  nor  Society  of 
Men,  can  be  under  Obligations  to  promote  or  pro- 
pagate any  Religion3  which  is  believed  by  him  or 

"tliem 


DEFENDED.  iSi 

them  to  be  falfe  -,  fo  all  Men  are  obliged  to  promote  Sect. 
the  Interefis  of  what  they  believe  to  be  the   true     ^^* 
Religion,  and  more  efpecialiy  after  any  fignal  In- 
terpofitions  of  divine  Providence  in  their  Favor. 

JVE  do  not  efiee-n  it  a  Dtity^  fays  the  Doftor, 
much  lefs  an  mdij-pe7tfihle  one^  in  Ccnfeq^uence  of  thefe 
Conqiiefts^  to  provide  for  the  Security  or  Support  of 
the  Religion  of  Epifcopalians^  any  more  than  the  Re- 
ligion of  other  Denominations  of  Chriftians  in  the 
Colonies.  But  he,  and  thofe  of  his  Perfuafion,  ought 
to  efteem  it  a  Duty  to  provide  for  the  Security  of 
their  own  Religion,  more  than  for  that  of  the  E- 
pifcopalians,  or  of  any  other  Denominations  of 
Chrillians  in  the  Colonies.  The  Cafe  is  the  fame, 
with  Regard  to  the  Members  of  the  Church  of 
England',  it  is  their  Duty,  in  the  firfc  Place,  and 
more  efpecialiy,  to  provide  for  the  Welfare  and  Se- 
curity of  their  own  Religion.  A  proper  Senfe  of 
this  general  Obligation  in  the  Members  of  the 
Church,  is  all  that  v/e  require  ;  v/e  claim  no  Rights 
for  curfelves,  but  what  we  allow  to  ail  others.  Both 
they  and  v/e  ought  undoubtedly  to  endeavor  to  fe- 
cure  and  promote  our  refpe6tiv€  Religions  ;  but 
we  fnould  all  remember,  what  we  are  generally  too 
apt  to  forget,  that  it  is  our  Duty  to  attempt  this,  only 
in  a  fair  and  honorable  Way,  on  either  Side,  and 
fo  as  not  to  interfere  with  the  religious  Priviieofes  of 
thofe  who  differ  from  us.  This  is  putting  the  Mat- 
ter upon  a  fair  and  equitable  Footing,  and  is  do- 
ing to  others,  as  we  would  have  them  do  to  us. 
ilnd  upon  no  worfe  a  Footing  than  this,  did  the 
Argument  of  the  Appeal  proceed.  It  v/as  not  pre- 
tended that  the  late  Difplay  of  the  divine  Gocdnefs 
in  America^  was  any  Reafon  why  tlie  Diffenters 
ftould  liipport  and  propagate  the  Religion  of  the 

Chvirch 


i82  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  Church  of  England^  m  America  ;  but  it  was,  and 
^•^'  ftill  is,  infiited,  that  it  is  a  good  Reafon  why  the 
Members  of  the  Chui*ch  fliould  :  And  as  thofe 
who  have  the  Diredion  of  cur  public  Affairs,  are 
chiefly  Perfons  belonging  to  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land^ it  is  a  good  Resibn  for  them  to  engage  im- 
mediately in  Behalf  of  this  Church  in  America^ 
and  even  to  provide  for  it  an  Epifcopate,  fince  it  is 
a  Provifion  fo  manifeftly  necefTary  for  its  Welfare 
and  Profperity. 

The  Do6lor  goes  on  for  fome  Pages,  endea- 
voring to  deftroy  the  Force  of  the  preceding  Ar- 
gument ;  but  what  he  has  faid  with  this  View,  ap- 
pears to  me  to  be  theweakeft  of  all  the  weak  Things 
he  has  offered  in  his  Performance.  In  p.  121,  he 
conceits  that  I  was  under  the  Influence  of  an  undue 
Warmth  of  Spirit^  when  I  urged  the  Conlideration 
which  is  now  in  Queftion.  I  confefs,  I  can  hardly 
write  upon,  or  confider,  the  "  maimed  State"  in 
which  the  American  Church  of  England  is  flill  fuf- 
fered  to  continue,  without  fome  Warmth  of  Sprit  \ 
but  that  I  have  been  influenced  by  an  undue  Warmth^ 
I  am  not  confcious,  nor  do  I  believe.  A  Zeal  for 
its  Intcrefiis,  fo  far  as  they  interfere  not  with  the 
juft  Right  of  others,  I  profefs  •,  but  no  farther. 
But  until  it  can  be  proved  that  my  Zeal  has  led 
me  to  propofe  unwarrantable  Meafures  for  the  Re- 
•  iief  of  the  Church,  or  that  I  have  not  fhewn  a  pro- 
per Regard  for  the  Principles  of  religious  Liberty  •, 
I  Ihall  not  be  convinced  that  I  have  difcovered  any 
undue  Warmth  of  Spirit.  But  if  there  can  be  fucli 
a  Thing  in  Nature,  it  moil  glaringly  and  notori- 
oufly  fhews  itfelf  in  the  Writers  againft  the  Appeal ; 
and  if  it  appears,  in  any  Degree,  in  the  Author  of 
it,  they  certainly,    of  all  Perfons,    have  the  leaft 

Right 


DEFENDED.  183 

Right  to  be  his  Accufers. — "  Firft  cafl  out  the  Sect. 
"  Beam  out  of  thine  own  Eye  j  and  then  fhalt    ^^^' 
"  thou  fee  clearly  to  caft  out  the  Mote  out  of  thy 
"  Brother's  Eye." 

The  Do6lor  proceeds  :  /  fcarce  know  how  to 
fpeak  upon  the  Matter  ferioujly^  it  is  placed  in  Jo 
ludicrous  a  Light.  He  fhould  rather  have  honeflly 
confefled,  that  he  fcarce  knew  how  to  reafon  upon 
*  the  Matter  juftly^  or  to  make  any  plaufible  Oppo- 
fition  to  the  Argument,  it  was  placed  in  fo  convince 
ing  a  Light.  Whether  there  was  any  Thing  ludi-' 
croiis  in  my  Reprefentation,  is  freely  fubmitted  to 
the  Reader's  Judgment.  In  what  Manner  it  ope- 
rated on  the  Doctor's  Seriotifnefs^  and  how  far  he 
could  have  been  in  a  gay  or  comic  Humor  when  op- 
prelTed  with  the  Weight  of  the  Argument,  may- 
be eafily  conje6lured.  That  in  this  Situation  he 
knew  not  how  to  reafon  upon  the  Matter  juftly^ 
appears  from  the  very  next  Sentence. 

NOrJVirHSTANDING  the  '  difeafed  periih- 
'  ing'  State  of  the  American  Churchy  have  not 
Praifes  and  Adorations^  according  to  the  '  pureft  and 
'  befl'  Forms  of  Devotion.,  been  offered  up  to  Al- 
mighty God.,  in  all  the  epif copal  Affemhlies  en  the  Con- 
tinefit.,  for  the  marvellous  InterpofJions  of  his  Pro- 
vidence., in  our  Behalf  in  the  late  War  ?  The  na^ 
tural  Import  of  which  Sentence  I  take  to  be  this  : 
The  epifcopal  Affemblies  on  the  Continent  have  offered 
up  Praifes.,  &c.  and  therefore  the  American  Church 
is  not  in  a  difeafed  perifhing  State.,  as  is  pretended. 
But  whether  this  was  really  meant,  I  am  not  cer- 
tain. Perhaps  the  leading  Sentiment  was,  that  the 
public  Thankfgivings  at  the  Conclufion  of  the 
^   War,  were  a  fuitable  Monument  of  Gratitude  for 

the 


i84  THE    A  PPE  AL 

S_ECT.   the  Succe/Tes  that  attended  it ;  and  therefore  that 
^^'     there  is  no  Need  of  an  Epifcopate,  conlldered  as 
a  Monument  of  Gratitude.    If  this  was  the  Mean- 
ing, it  was  improperly  expreiTed  ;  and   the  Me- 
thod of  reafbning  is  as  obnoxious  as  the  Manner 
of  expreffing  it.     A  Monument  is  alv/ays   under- 
Hood  to  be  Something  that  is  permanent,  and  vifi- 
ble  to  the  World  •,  it  mufr  necelTarily  be  a  Work, 
and  not  an  Energy,  or  tranfient  Ad:.     The  o-e' 
neral  public  Thankfgiving  v/as  a  fuitable  Triiul^ 
of  Gratitude,  but  it  could  be  no  Monument.     But 
even  if  it  was,  it  might  have  been  our  Duty  to  raife 
other  Monuments  of  Gratitude,    and  that  of  an 
Epifcopate  among  the  reft,     The  Dodor  mentions 
grateful  Hearts  and  "jv ell- ordered  Converfations  as  be- 
ing fuitable  Monuments  on  that  Occafion.  I  intircly 
agree  with  him  in  this ;  and  1  believe  the  Obliga- 
tion to  ered  them,  was  not  in  the  leaft  fuperfeded 
by  the  Monument,  if  we  are  fo  to  call  it,  of  a 
public  Thankfgiving.   The  Truth  is,  as  I  conceive, 
all  pofTible  Honor  ought  to  be  paid  to  the  fupremc 
Ruler  of  Events,    and  every  proper  Monument 
of  religious  Gratitude  ought  to  be  raifed,  v/henever 
his  Providence  calls  us  to  proclaim,  and  perpetuate, 
to  the  World,  our  Senfe  of  his  great  and  diflin' 
guifhing  Goodnefs. 


S  E  C  r. 


DEFEND  E  a  H  iS^ 

SECTION    VII. 

THE  next  Sedion  of  the  Jppeal  treats  of  the  Sect: 
Obligations  we  are  under  as  Chriftians,  to  ^^ 
propagate  the  Gofpel  amongft  the  American  Hea- 
thens, and  of  the  Advantages  that  nnight  be  ex- 
pedted  from  an  Epifcopate,  in  the  Condud:  and 
Execution  of  that  good  Work,  whenever  it  fhall 
be  undertaken  upon  that  extenfive  Plan,  which 
many  worthy  Members  of  the  Society  propofe.  As 
to  what  was  faid  concerning  our  Obligations  to 
this  Duty,  I  am  fo  happy  as  to  find  Dr.  Chauncy 
moftly  agreeing  with  me  in  Sentiments  •,  but  with 
Regard  to  the  proper  Methods  of  performing  it, 
and  the  Ufefulnefs  of  an  Epifcopate  to  that  End, 
we  differ,  as  is  ufual. 

The  firft  Thing  he  controverts  in  this  Seftion^ 
is  the  Propriety  of  civilizing  Savages  in  Order  to 
their  Convcrfion.  I  had  afligned  fome  Reafons,' 
and  produced  fome  Authorities,  to  fupport  what 
appears  to  have  become  the  general  Opinion  ; 
namely,  that  Humanity,  or  Civility  of  Manners, 
is,  in  fome  Degree,  previoufly  neceflary,  that 
Chriftianity  may  have  its  proper  Effedl  upon  the 
American  Heathens.  Againft  what  was  offered  to 
this  Purpofe,  the  Dodor  oppofes  the  Experience 
of  New-England^  telling  us,  p.  125,  that  man;;^ 
bribes  of  them  (the  Indians)  in  the  Maffachufett'i 
Province^  have^  by  this  MeanSy  viz.  ^'he  Englijh  Way 
ef  Livings  keen  fo  depopulated^  that  thm  are  noijj 

B  b  S^^JSl^ 


f86  THE    APPEAL 

^vrr**  ^^^^^^  ^^^^  Remains  of  them  to  befeen.  From  whence 
^^'  he  feems  to  be  pofitive  in  this  Conclufton,  that 
there  is  not  any  Need  of  what  is  called  civilizin«' 
them^  in  Order  to  their  embracing  Chriflianity,  Tbetr 
being  Savages^  fays  he,  and  living  in  a  Way  different 
from  what  we  do^  is  no  Reafon  why  their  Converfion 
may  not  be  expe^fed^  if  fuitable  Means  were  ufedwitb 
tbehny  p.  126. 

As  to  the  Depopulation  of  fome  Tribes  of  In- 
dians within  the  Bounds,   or  on  the  Borders  of 
New-England^  it  may  have  been  greatly  owing  to 
fome  Vices,  which  their  Intercowrfe  with  the  E^g^ 
lifh  furniflied  them  with  an  Opportunity  to  indul^. 
But  there  is  no  natural  Connection,  I  hope,  between 
Civility  of  Manners,  and  the  Pradice  of  fuch  de- 
Urudive  Vices.    I  cannot  learn  that  the  Indians 
thus  deftroyed  were  greatly  civilized.  Barely  com- 
ing once  in  awhile  amongft  the  Englifh  Inhabitants, 
difpofmg  of  their  Peltry,  and  purchafmg  fuch  Ar- 
ticles as  they  commonly  received  in  Exchange,  could 
not  much  improve  the  Manners  of  Savages.    They 
muft  know  fomething  of  Letters,    refide  in  fixed 
Habitations,  pradice  Hulbandry  and  the  neceflary 
mechanic  Arts,  before  they  can  be  faid  to  have 
come  out  of  their  favage  State.     Now  it  is  incon- 
ceiveable  that  either  of  thefe  Particulars,  or  all  of 
them,  can  have  a  Tendency  to  deftroy  any  Part  of 
the  human  Species.    If  any  of  the  "Tribes  in  the 
MaffachufettS'Province^  which  were  fo  far  civilized, 
have  bifn  depopulated :,  it  cannot  have  been  owing 
to  their  Englifh  Way  of  livings  but  to  other  Caufesj 
perhaps  to  fuch  as  were  accidental  or  local.   I  have 
met  with  feveral  New-England  Writers  who  differ 
widely  from  the  Dodor ;  afcribing  the  Depopula- 
tion (^  ki  many  Indian  Tribes,  ngt  t©  the  Caufe 

afligned 


DEFENDED.  ,8-^ 

aHigned  by  him,  but  to  the  immediate  Hand  of  Sect>- 
God,  who  thought  fit  to  cut  off  thofe  idolatrous  ^^I- 
Nations,  to  make  Room  for  the  Settlement  of  his 
^hofen  People.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  Nature  and 
Difpofition  of  Savages,  of  all  Ages,  of  all 
Countries  and  Complexions,  are  fo  nearly  the  fame ; 
that  all  the  Trials  which  have  been  made  with  any 
of  them,  as  well  as  what  has  happened  in  New- 
England,  will  afford  Light  tp  the  prefent  general 
Subjeft.  ^ 

Christianity,  as  was  obferved  from  Dr.  Bra)\ 
ilourifhed  or  declined  in  the  early  Ages  of  the 
Church,  in  almoft  an  exad  Proportion  to  Men's 
Improvement  in  Letters  and  civilized  Manners. 
In  modern  Ages,  the  moft  judicious  and  experi- 
cnced  Miffionaries,  have  judged  that  the  Gofpci 
can  have  but  little  Effed  with  Barbarians  and  Sava- 
ges. It  was  a  Maxim  with.  Father  Ltf^^/,  who  had 
been  a  celebrated  Miflionary  in  the  American  I- 
flands,  "  that  in  Order  to  make  the  Americans 
"  Christians,  it  was  previoufly  neceffary  to  make 
«  them  Men*.'  Hans  Egede,  a  Banifrj  Miflionary, 
who  hadrefided  25  Years  in  Greenland,  was  of  the 
fame  Opinion.  "  It  is  a  Matter  that  cannot  be 
*'  queflioned,  fays  he,  that  if  you  will  make  a  Man 
"  aChriftian  out  of  a  mere  Savage  and  wild  Man, 
^^  you  muft  firft  make  him  a  reafonable  Man.— It 
"  would  contribute  a  great  Deal  to  forward  their 
*'  Conyerfion,  if  they  could,  by  Degrees,  be 
*'  brought  into  a  fettled  Way  of  Lifef."  Father 
Hennepin,  for  many  Years  a  Miffionaiy  in  Canada 
and  the  interior  Parts  of  America,  among  the  Ob- 
Ikcles  in  the  Way  of  converting  the  American  In- 

B  b  2  diaijs, 

•  MoJheim\  EcGlcfiaflical  Hiftory,  Vol  II.  p.  307, 
t  ^^^  the  Dmne  Legation,  &c.  Vol.  II.  p.  71, 


i88  THE    APPEAL 

S^cr.  dians,    mentions   their   favage  Manner  of  Life*- 
yiL    4c  They  are  not  fixed  in  a  Place,  carrying  no  longer 
''  in  their  Villages,  than  till  Harveft  is  over,  which  ? 
«'  is  but  a  fmall  Time  •,  all  the  reft  of  the  Year  \ 
**  they  pafs  in  Wars  and  hunting  :  Then  they  carry  ( 
*'  all  their  Families  with  them,    and  are  abfent  '] 
*^  eight  or  nine  Months ;  their  Children  then  for-   ' 
*^  get  all,  and  return  to  their  former  Manner  of  ' 
*'  Living*."     Thefe  are  the  Sentiments  of  fome^j 
of  the   moft   famous  MifTionaries  of  thefe  latter  \ 
'  Ages,  in  different  Parts  of  the  World.    The  moft  : 
celebrated  Writers,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  have  ^ 
joinied  in  the  fame  Opinion.     The  very  learned  i 
Mo/heim  fays  :    "  As  to  thofe  Indians,   who  live- ', 
*'  more  remote  from  the  European  Settlements,  and?  i 
*'  wander  about  in  the  Woods  without  any  fixed  | 
**  Habitation,  they  are  abfolutely  incapable  either  f 
*'  of  receiving  or  retaining  any  adequate  Notions^  \ 
*'  of  the  Chriftian  Do6lrine,  unlefs  they  be  previ- 
^'  oufly  reclaimed  from  that  vagarant  Manner  of  ' 
"  Life,    and   civilized    by    an    Intercourfe   with 
*'  Perfons,  whofe  humane  and  infrnqating  Manners 
*'  are  adapted  to  attract  their  Love  and  excite  their 
"  Imitation^:."     The  more  learned  Author  of  the 
Divine  Legation  of  Mofes^  fays:  "  Chriftianity, 
♦'  plain  and  fimple  as  it  is,  and  fitted  in  its  Na- 
*'  ture  for  what  it  was  defigned  by  its  Author,  re-. 
*'  quires  an  Intelled  above  that  of  a  mere  Savage 
*'  to  underftand.     Something  then  muft  be  previa 
*'  ous  to  it.      And  what  is  that  Something  but 
"  Civil  SociETvf ."     Again,   he  complains  that 
fome  Men,  "  having  taken  it  into  their  Heads'* 
(like  Dr.  Chauncy)  "  that  the  Vices  of  improved 

Lif^ 

"^Millerh  Propagation  of  Chriftianity,  Vol.  II.  p.  z^Zt 
1  Ecclefiaftical  Hillory,  Vol.  II.  p.  306. 
•J-  Pivine  l<e£ation  of  il/o/^/.  Vol.  II,  p.  70, 


DEFENDED.  189 

**  Life  would  more  indifpofe  the  Indians  to  the  Sect. 
"  Precepts  of  the  Gofpel,  than  their  prefent  Bru-  ^^ 
"  tality  incapacitates  them  from  comprehending 
*'  the  Do  brines  of  it,  have  concluded  it  beft,  upon 
"  the  whole,  to  keep  their  Eyes  fhuc  to  the  Ad- 
"  vantages  of  civil  Life*."  I  might  eafily  produce 
the  Authority  of  many  other  great  Names,  to  the 
fame  Purpofe ;  but  the  above,  I  apprehend,  are  fuf- 
ficient  to  counter- ballance  the  Weight  of  Dr.  Cbaun- 
ry's,  who  barely  gives  his  Opinion,  without  offer.-^ 
ing  his  Reafons. 

The  next  Thing  he  controverts,  is  my  Account 
of  the  Society's  Plan  for  a  more  general  and  vigo- 
rous Attempt  to  convert  the  American  Heathens. 
Not  that  the  Fa6l  is  denied,  or  the  Propriety  of 
the  Refolution  difputed  ;  but  it  is  pretended,'  that 
this  Account  contradidts  what  had  been  before  af- 
ferted,  namely, '  that  the  Support  and  Propagation 
*-  of  the  Gofpel  among  our  own  People  in  America^ 
^  was  the  immediate  and  princpial  Defign  of  their 
*  Incorporation.'  Whether  the  Converfion  of  the 
Heathens  was,  or  was  not,  the  Obje6l  primarily- 
and  more  immediately  in  View,  when  the  Society 
was  incorporated,  may  be  eafily  feen.  The  Charter 
of  Incorporation,  and  an  authentic  Hiflory  of  the 
Rife  and  Progrefs  of  that  charitable  Inilitution  for 
near  thirty  Years,  are  extant,  and  Copies  of  them 
are  in  many  Hands.  It  would  be  very  extraordinary 
indeed,  if  the  Charter  fhould  have  mifiaken  its 
own  immediate  and  primary  Object ;  and  equally 
extraordinary,  if  the  original  Members,  who  ap- 
plied for  it,  Ihould  not  have  known  their  own  In= 
mentions.  The  Charter  mentions  the  great  End  m 
View  to  be  no  other,  thaa "  to  promote  the  Glory 


"  of 


f  Divine  Legation  of  Mofes^  Vol.  II.  p.  72. 


I90  THE     APPEAL 

%n:  "  f  ^rt'a^  '^^  Inftruftion  of  our  People  in 
"  the  Chnftian  Religion."     In  the   Preamble   it 
fpeaks  no  lefs  than  ibrice  of  the  King's  loving 
Subjects    as  tne  great  and  immediate  Objeft  of 
the  intended  Chanty ;  and  fays  not  a  Word  of  the 
Jmertcm  nt^htns.  And  it  appears  from  the  Hif- 
tory  or  the  Society,    from  their  yearly  Abftrafts 
and  anniverfary  Sermons,  that  the  Members  of 
that  venerable  Body,  never  underftood,  or  ima<.ined 
that  the  Converfion  of  Heathens  was  to  be'thS 
principal    and     more    immediate    Work       The 
Cafe  is  fo  uncommonly  plain,  that  even  Dr.  Mav- 
he-w,  was  compelled  by  the  Force  of  Evidence 
contrary  to  his  own  Inclination  and  the  Scope  of 

'"vS^!?rpT'V'°'°"^f '  '^^'  "it  wears  that  the 
Brit.fi  Plantations,  &c.  were  really  the  prima- 

«  ?  5'°''^/«r^^^^  Objea  of  this   Inftitutioi,. 
or  the  King's  Subjects*."     But  at  the  fame 
Time  it  is  ^rther  evident,  although  not  from  the 
Charter  as  Dr.  Maybew  pretended,  that  the  Con- 
verfion of  the  American  Heathens  was  notwith-' 
ftanding  an  Objeft  more  remotely  in  View,  with 
many  of  the  original  and  principal  Members,  and 
very  probably  with   the  Royal  Founder  himfelf. 
And,  from  the  Beginning  to  this  Day,  the  Society 
have  ahvays  underftood  that  they  have  a  difcreti 
onary  Power  of  employing  fuch  a  Part  of  the  Do' 
nations  intrufted  with  them,  as  their  more  immedi- 
ateDuty  to  theKing's^«^.„V<?«&^yV^,  would  admit 
o.    for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gofpel  amongft  the 
Indians  bordering  upon  our  Settlements.    Accord- 
ingly     they  have  always  employed  fome  Perfons  in 
his  Service;  and  I  believe  it  may  be  truly  faid, 
that  they  have  never  neglefted  any  fair  Opening 
.  to  introduce  the. Gofpel  amongft  the  Amerkfu 

'i  Heathens, 
Obfervatjqns,  Uz,  p.  ^g.   ' 


DEFENDED.  191 

*  Heathens,  efpecially  if  proper  Perfons  could  be   Sect. 

*  found,    to  engage  in  fuch  a  MilTion.'     Where         * 
now  is  the  Inconfiftency  in  all  this  ?  May  not  the 
Converfion  of  the  Indians  be  properly  an  Obieft 
conilantly  aimed  at  by  this  worthy  Society,  although 

not  its  primary  and  immediate  Obje<5l  ?  Is  not  pri- 
mary  a  relative  Term,  fuppofing  Something  tliat  is 
fecondary^  or  to  follow  it  ?  Has  it  ever  been  faid 
on  the  Side  of  the  Church,  that  the  Society.,  fo 
far  as  they  have  engaged  in  propagating  the  Gof- 
pel  amongll  the  Savages,  have  a6led  improperly  ? 
Or,  that  they  undertook  what  was  not  their  proper 
Work  ?  And,  now  an  Epifcopate  is  in  View^  is  it 
faid  or  infinuated,  that  it  is  their  primary  and  im- 
mediate Objedl  ?  Where  then  is  the  Contradidlion 
that  is  pretended  ?  And  how  utterly  groundlefs  is 
the  following  Reflexion  ?  ^he  Writers  on  the  epif- 
copalian  S.ide,  have  the  Advantage  beyond  all  others, 
They  can  make  Ufe  of  the  fam^  Argument^  with  a 
good  Grace^  to  contrary  Purpofes^  p.  127. 

As  to  the  Advantage  here  mentioned,  if  it  had 
been  really  claimed  or  made  Ufe  of  by  the  Wri- 
ters on  the  epif  copalian  Side^  it  cannot  juftly  be  faid 
that  they  claim,  or  make  Ufe  of  it^  beyond  all 
ethers.  I  can  point  out  an  Example  that  is  equal 
to  it,  which  has  been  Matter  of  common  Obfer- 
vation.  The  Doctor  well  knows  that  the  Writers 
&n  the  anti-epifcopalian  Side,  for  feveral  Years  beforo 
the  Publication  of  the  Appeal,  had  afferted  and  ftre- 
nuoufly  contended,  that  the  Church  of  England 
has  no  general  Eftablilhment  in  the  American  Co- 
lonies. But,  now  an  Epifcopate  is  in  View,  they 
can  tell  us  a  different  Story, — arguing,  that  the 
propofed  Epifcopate  mull  operate  here  in  the  fame 
Manner  that   epifcopal  Government  operates  in 

England^ 


THE    APPEAL 

England^  becaufe  of  its  general  Eilablilhment.  They 
do  not  indeed  commonly  go  fo  far  as  to  fay,  diredl- 
ly  and  in  plain  Words,  that  the  Church  is  thus  efta» 
blifhed  in  the  Colonies  ;  but  their  Way  of  reafon- 
ing  manifeflly  implies  it.  So  that,  we  fee,  the 
Writers  againft  the  Church  have  alfo  the  Mv  ant  age 
of  making  L//>  of  the  fame  Argument  ^to  contrary  Pur- 
pofes^  or  rather,  of  oppofite  Principles  to  the  fame 
Purpofe  ;  but  I  cannot  fay  that  they  do  this  with 
^  good  Grace* 

Instead  of  the  Advantages  expeded  from  car- 
rying on  the  Attempts  to  profelyte  the  American 
Heathens,  under  the  Diredlion  of  a  refident  Bilhop, 
the  Dodor  fays,  this  fuperint ending  Bufinefs  mighty 
to  better  Purpofe^  be  put  into  other  Hands ^  p.  128. 
He  then  introduces  the  Society  in  Scotland^  for  the 
Propagation  of  Chriftian  Knowledge^  and  the  honor- 
able  Company  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gofpel  in 
New -England^  who  manage  their  Affairs  by  Commif- 
Jioners^  confifting  of  the  Laity  as  well  as  Clergy^ 
as  Inftances  to  prove,  that  the  Superintendency  of 
a  Bifhop  would  be  no  Advantage  to  our  Society, 
'  with  Regard  to  the  Converfion  of  the  Indians.  It 
might  as  well  be  proved,  from  the  Example  of 
the  Churches  in  the  Colonies^  that  a  Bifhop  is  not 
neceffary  for  the  Purpofe  of  Ordination^  fince, 
with  them,  that  End  is  alfo  obtained  without  a  Bi- 
fhop. But  it  fhould  have  been  remembered,  that 
although  a  Bilhop  in  neither  Cafe  is  neceffary  on 
their  Principles,  yet  in  both  Cafes  he  may  be  necef- 
fary on  ours. 

The  Example  of  thofe  two  Societies  can  be 
cxpeded  to  have  but  little  Effed  upon  the  World, 
until  their  Condud  fhall  be  better  known  to  the 

Public, 


DEFENDED.  193 

Public.    An  Account  of  their  Conflitution,  of  the  Sect. 
Condition  and  Management   of  their   Funds,    of    ^^^' 
the  Perfons  employed  in  their  Service,    and  the 
Places   and  State  of  their  particular  Miflions,    is 
a  Defideratiim  which  has   been   long   looked  tor ; 
and  until  it  is  obtained,  many  Perfons  will  entertain 
unfavorable   Sufpicions.     The  Do6tor  tells  us,  in 
general,  that  they  have^  ^at  this  Day^  zvithhi  the 
Majfachufetts-Province— Sixteen  Clergymen^  Englijh 
and  Indian^  ft  ate  dly  labouring^  either  as  Paftors  of  fo 
many  Indian  Churches^  or  as  Preachers  to  /ijfemblies 
of  Indians  that  meet  together  for   divine  JVorfhip  ; 
Nine  Englifb   Le5furerSy    and  Seven  ft-ated  School- 
Mafters^  befides  occafional  ones^  p.    129.     But  this 
general  Intelligence  is  by  no  Means  fatisfaclory  *,  it 
rather  raifes  our  Curiofity  to  know  how  Twenty-five 
Paftors,  Preachers  and  Ledlurers  are  employed,  as 
well  as  where^  to  what  Numbers^  and  to  what  Pur^ 
fofe^  they  are  refpedively  fent.     For  according  to    . 
Mr.  Hutchinfonh   Account*,    the  Indians    in  the 
Majfachufetts  and  Plymouth^  are  fo  greatly  v/afted  a- 
way,  that  they  amount  to  no  more  than  about   80 
Families  dxMafJoapee^  the  famiC Number  2XMartha^s 
Vineyard^    70  Families   at  Stockbridge^  and    15  cX 
Nantucket^  befides  a  fev/  fcattered  Families  in  dif- 
ferent Parts  of  the  Province.  But  how  Twenty-five 
Paftors,  Preachers  and  Ledurers  can  be  properly 
employed,  only  in  the  four  Places  of  Mafhapee^ 
Martha' s-Vineyard^  Stockbridge  and  Nantucket^  con- 
taining about  245  Families  of  Indians,    requires 
fome  Explanation.    It  might  be  not  imiproper  alfo 
to  inform  the  Public,  what  the  Difference  is  be- 
tween their  Preachers  to  Affejnhlies  of  Indians y  and 
the  EngJifh  LeSurers  employed  in  the  fame  gene- 
ral Work  of  miniftering  to  the  Indians  -,  for  at 

C  c  prefent 

•  Hift.  Mair,  Vol.  I.  p.  169,  in  a  Npte, 


194  THE    A  PPE  AL 

%u'  prefcnt  it  is  unintelligible  to  many  People.  In 
laying  this  Information  is  wanted,  and  has  been 
long  cxpedred,  I  do  not  mean  to  condemn  the  Con- 
dud  of  thofe  two  Societies.  From  the  refpedable 
Charaders  of  fome  who  are  faid  to  be  Members 
of  them,  I  cannot  believe  tJiem  to  be  guilty  of 
any  finiller  Intentions.  But  why  is  the  Light  of  a 
good  Example  concealed  from  the  World  ?  Why 
do  they  not  pul^lijh  an  Account  of  their  Proceed- 
ings, that  all  injurious  Sufpicions  may  be  obviated 
.  Or  removed  ? 

As  to  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gof 
pel,  the  Dodtor  fears  whether,  in  what  is  propofed 
l/'i^  ^^^^^^  ^^^^»  ^^  Regard  to  the  Church,  as  efia- 
hhfhed  in  England,  may  not  he  too  much  mingled  with 
the  common  Caufe  of  Chriftianity .    A  friendly  Cau- 
tion of  this  Nature  would  undoubtedly  be  well  ac^ 
cepted,  as  all  Chriftians  are  more  or  lefs  liable  to 
iiiingle  the  Interefls  of  Party  with  the  common  Caufe 
of  Chriftianity.  But  this  Society  is  as  irreproachable 
m  this  Refped,  as  any  Society  that  can  be  mention- 
ed, without  Exception.  Its  Members  hitherto  appear 
to  have  aded  as  dilinterefledly,  and  to  have  mingled 
Confiderations  of  a  private  Nature  with  their  pub- 
lic Proceedings  as  little,  as  can  be  expeded  from  the 
bell  of  Men.  They  are  difpofed  to  be  upon  friend- 
ly Terms  with  all  Denominations  of  Chriftians  in 
the  Colonies  -,  and  if  there  is  any  Danger  of  their 
ading  contrary  to  fuch  a  Difpofition,  it^muft  arife, 
not  from  themfelves,  but  from  thofe  who  make  it 
in  fome  Degree  neceifary,  by  an  unreafonable  Op^ 
pofition  to  all  their  Meafures.     It  is  natural  for 
Men  to  defend  themfelves ;  and  fo  far  as  Self-De- 
fence  Ihall  oblige  them  to  regard  the  peculiar  In- 
Urcjls  of  the  Church  of  England,  they  may  be  ex-^ 

pe<51;ecj 


DEFENDED.  ,9^ 

peded  to  be  cautious.     But  I  dare  rifque  all  my  Sect. 
Interefr  and  Reputation    upon  it,    that  they  will     ^•^' 
never  be  backward  to  cultivate,   on  their  Part,  a 
friendly  Correfpondence  with  every  Denomination 
©f  Proteftants,  whether  here  or  elfewhere. 

*■ .  As  America  Is  the  Region  wherein  the  divine 
*  Goodnefs  has  been  more  remarkably  difplayed  in 
'  Favor  of  the  Britijh  Nation,'    the  Dodlor  con- 
cludes that  Americans  are  the  proper  Perfons  to  ere^ 
'  fome  fuitable  Monument  of  religious  Gratitude/ 
on  that  Account^  p.  130.   But  if  thlt  Goodnefs  was 
not  difplayed   in  Favor  of  Americans^    Americans 
are  under  no  Obligations  of  Gratitude  on  Account 
of  it.  ^  If  it  was  '  difplayed  in  Favor  of  the  Britijh 
'  Nation,'  the  Britijh  Nation  is  under  Obligations 
to  ered:'  fome  fuitable  Monument  of  reTigious 
^  Gratitude.'     The  Truth  of  the  Cafe  is,  as°  the 
Britijh  Nation  in  general,   and  the  Americans  in 
particular,  were  remarkably  favored  by  divine  Pro- 
vidence in  the  late  War,  the  Duty  is  incumbent; 
upon  both  j  and  faying  that  the  Americans  are  o-. 
bliged,  is  not  proving  that  the  Nation  is  not  obliged,' 
to  perform  it.     The  Dodior  feems  to  allow  of  my 
Pofition,    that  '  America  is  the  very  Ground,  on 
^  which  fome  fuitable  Monument  of  religious  Gra- 
"  titude  ought  to  be  ereded;'  and  he  differs  not 
greatly  from  me,  when  he  fays,  what  more  Juitahk 
cne^  than  a  vifihle  perpetually  jianding  Tejiimony  of 
their  pious  Concern^  and  earneji  Care,  to  fpread  thi 
Knowledge  of  their  only  Lord  who  has  done  fiich  great 
^Things  for  them  P  The  chief  Difference  between  us 
is,  that  he  feems,  in  this  PafTage,  to  make  that  to 
be  the  whole  of  the  Teflimony  of  their  pious  Concern 
and  '  religious  Gratitude,'  which  I  WQuld  have  tp 
be  but  a  Part  of  it. 

c  c  2  n% 


196  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.       He  goes  on  to  complain,  that  the  Endeavors  of 
^^*    the  ncn-epifc'opal  Clergy  and  Laity  in  the  Maffachu- 
fetts-Province,  to  do  fomething  in  this  Way,  upon 
it  he  Condufton   of  the  late  War^  w^re  defeated   at 
Home.     For  he  tells  ns,  that  after  a  large  Sub- 
fcription  was  made  in  Bofton  for  a  Fund  to  fupport 
Mifiionaries   in  the   Mohawk   Country^    &c.  Upon 
Conditio'ti  that  there  might  he  an  incorporated  Society 
among  our/elves  (fays  he)  for  the  conducing  and  ma- 
naging  this  important  Affair :  An  incorporating  A51  was 
'prepared^  and  paffed  by  the  fever al  Branches  of  the  Go- 
vsrnment  here^  and  fent  Home  for  the  Royal  San5fion^ 
without  which  it  could  not  continue  in  Force.    But  it 
fcon  met  with  a  Negative^  by  which  Means  this  whole 
Money  was  lofi.     And  he  intimates  that  the  Difap- 
pointment  v/as  occafioned  by  episcopal  Influence, 
What  he  means  here  by  epifcopal  Influence^  in  his  Re- 
marks on  the  Bifhop  ofLandaff's  Sermon^  he  muft  be 
fuppofed  to  explain  in  the  following  Words  :    It  is 
hoped,  fays  he,  the  Accounts  we  have  had  are  not  true^ 
that  the  Negative  upon  this  A5i,  was  principally  ow- 
ing to  the  Influence  of  fome  of  the  moji  important  Mem- 
bers of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  GofpeL 
Now  to  the  Accufation  evidently  implied  in  thefe 
Words,  the  very  fenfible  Author  of  y^  Vindication 
of  the  Bifhop  of  Landaff's  Sermon,  has  thus  re- 
plied :  "  The  Dodor  may  be  affured  that  his  Hope 
*'  is  well  founded,  and  the  Accounts  he  had,  not 
"  true,  Befides  the  utter  Improbability  that  aNum- 
**".  ber  of  eminently  pious  Men  who  have  the  Con- 
verfion  of  the  Savages  much  at  Heart,  would  op- 
pofe  fuch  a  Meafure  for  that  Purpofe  -,  I  will 
here  fubjoin  an  Extradl  of  a  Letter  from  one  of 
'^  the  mofi  important  Members  of  the  Society  to 
*'  his  Friend  in  this  Country,,  dated  0^7.  1762, 
"  and  which  confutes  that  Calumny.     Speaking 

"of 


DEFENDED.  197 

**  of  this  Affair,  he  fays — "The  Plan  as  frefented^   Sect. 
*'  was  liable  to  fever al  Objections  \  particularly  that     ^  * 
*'  the  Members  were  to  be  accountable  only  to  them- 
*'  f elves.     However  the   Society  made  no  Opposi- 
*'  TioN  TO  IT*."     The  Letter  here  quoted  I  have 
feen,   and  from  an  Acquaintance  with  the  Hand- 
Writing,  know  it  to  be  genuine.   The  Author  of  it 
was  no  lefs  a  Perfon,  a  no  lefs  important  Member  of 
the  Society^  than  their  President  at  that  Time  ; 
whofe  eminent  Integrity,  Abilities,  and  Attention 
to  the  Affairs  of  the  Society,  leave  no  PofTibility  of 
fufpediing  that  he  could  either   mifreprefent,    or 
miftake,  the  Matter.  And  from  his  fhort  Account, 
thefe  Things  appear,  viz.  That  the  Plan  was  not 
fo  properly  reje6led,  as  the  Draught  that  was  pre- 
fented — that  the  Draught  was   reje6ted,    not  be- 
caufe  the  Defign  of  it  was  difliked,  but  becaufe  it 
was  improperly  framed — and,  that  the  Rejection, 
whether  juilifiable  or  not,  was  not  owing,  in  any 
Degree,    to  the  Society.     Mr.  Apthorp^    another 
Member  of  the  Society,  after  inquiring  upon  the 
Spot,  goes  farther,  and  fays  :  "  I  can  afHrm,  on 
very  good  Authority,  that  neither  the  Society 
nor  any  Epifcopalians,  as  fuch^  oppofed  the  A6t 
of  the  Bofion  AlTembly  for  the   Purpofe  here 
*'  mentioned.     It  was  rejeded  merely  on  political 
"  and  commercial  Reafons,  which  arofe  from  the 
"  Manner  of  drawing  it  up,  and  were  reprefented 
"  by  the  Board  of  Trade  to  the  Privy-Council, 
"  who  unanimoufly  difapproved  it,  when  there  was 
*'  not  one  Bifhop  prefent  •,    as    appears   from   the 
*'  Council-Books§."  Now  that  Dr.  Chauncy  fhould 
take  no  Notice  at  all  of  fo  clear  and  full  an  Evi- 
dence of  the  Society's  Innocence,  with  Regard  to 

an 

*  Vtndicat,  p.  74. 

S  Rt'vU'vj  of  Dr.  Mayht'w'^  Remarks,  p.  39. 


198  THE    APPEAL 

%U-  ^"  Accufadon  that  bore  fo  hard  upon  the  Reouta: 
^"-    tion  of  that  moft  refpeftable  Bod^-anESnS 
that  carries  double  Convidtion  to  thofe  who  are  ar 
quamted  witli  Mr.  Jpthorfs  excellent  and  amiable 
Charafter,  to  which  the  Doftor  can  be  no  Stran 
ger;  but  that  notwithftanding,  he  Ihould  f^ill  ^o 
on    from  Pamphlet  to  Pamphlet,  intimating  black 
Sufpicions  of  Guilt,  and  throwing  out  Reproaches 
founded  at  bell  upon  diftant  hear-fay,    as  if  the 
Ballance  of  Proof  were  againft  the  Society;  is  one 
of   thofe   flrange,    modern    Jmerican  Pha-mmena 
which  admit  not  of  an  eafy  Solution.     The  moft 
natural  and  favorable  Way  of  accounting  for  it 
perhaps,  is  to  fuppofe  that  the  Doftor  wrottin  fuch 
a  Hurry,  both  againft  the  Bilhop  of  Landars  Ser- 
mon and  the  Appeal,  as  not  to  give  himfelf  Time 
to  recolleft  many  Things  which  materially  concera 
his  Subjeft,     But  I  forbear. 


SECT. 


DEFENDED.  199 

SECTION    VIII. 


THE  next  Sedlion  of  the  yfppeal  cont3.ins  '  the  Se^t. 
'  Plan    on  which   alone   American    Bifliops    vill, 

*  have  been  requefted,  fairly  ftated,  with  Expoftu- 

*  lations  on  the  Reafonablenefs  thereof.'  Dr.  Chaun- 
cy^  in  his  Anfwer  to  it,  begins  with  taking  Notice 
of  what  he  calls,  a  Copy  of  the  Petition  that  zvas 
fent^  by  a  Number  of  the  epifcopal  Clergy^  to  the 
Univerftty  of  Cambridge^  which  had  lately  appeared 
in  one  of  the  public  Papers  at  Bofion  •,  in  which 
Copy  there  are  feveral  Expreffions  which  he  looks 
on  as  highly  exceptionable.  This  Copy  I  have  feen  ; 
its  Editor  and  Annotator  pretended  that  it  was  the 
Tranfcript  of  an  Addrefs  drav/n  up  and  fent,  by 
a  Convention  of  the  epifcopal  Clergy  of  New-Tork, 
and  Nem-Jerfey.  But  the  Do6lor  mull  have  fince 
heard  that  the  Convention  difclaims  it ;  and  I  can 
and  do  afTure  him  that  it  is  fidlitious  and  falfe,  and 
that  the  Convention  fent  home  no  fuch  Addrefs, 
nor  any  that  contained  fimilar  Expreffions  with, 
thofe  which  he  cenfures. 

He  informs  us,  in  p.  135,  that  fome  of  the  mofi 
refpe£fable  Epifcopalians  in  New-England— i?^':;^  de-^ 
dared  it  to  be  their  Opinion^  that  Biftoops  would  he 
of  no  Service  here^  and  that  they  did  not  defire  they 
Jhould  be  fent.  Whether  he  has  any  Thing  pecu- 
liar in  his  Idea  of  refpe^able  Epifcopalians^  and  of 
a  fieady  Attachment  to  the  Inter efi  of  the  Church  of 
En^landy  which  he  makes  to  be  part  gf  their  Cha- 

.  raster ; 


200  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  racier;  and  what  we  are  to  underftand  by  the  in- 
^^*    definite  Word  fome^  whether  Two  or  Two  Hun- 
dred, is  impoflible  for  me  to  fay.     He  may  have 
met  with,  or  heard  of,  fome^  i,  e.  Two   or  more 
refpe5iable  Epifcopalians^  who  were  not  defirous  of 
having  Bilhops  in  America^  meaning  Bifhops  with 
fuch  temporal  Powers  as  they  exercife  in  England: 
But  I  much  queflion  whether  there  is  an  Epifcopa- 
lian  upon  the  Continent,  either  of  a  more  or  lefs 
refpedtable  Chara6ler,  including  in  it  fome  Degree 
of  Attachnent  to  the  Interejl  of  the  Churchy  that 
has  objeded  againft  an  Epifcopate  upon  the  Plan 
of  the  Appeal,     If  there   be  any  fuch,  I  will  ven- 
ture to  affirm,  that  they  have   aded  a  very  unna- 
tural, inconfiftent  Part.     For  how  abfurd  is  it  for 
a  Man,  who  is  attached  to  the  Intereft  of  the 
Church   of   England  in  America^    not   to  wifh  it 
Soundnefs  and  Health  ?  But  how  can  it  be  found 
and  healthy,  while  its  Conftitution  is  broken,  and 
deprived  of  that  which  is  effential  to  its  Well-be- 
ing ?  Where  can  be  the  Harm  of  having  epifcopal 
Ordination  adminiftred  in  the  Colonies  ?  "  What 
*'  is  the  Fear,'*  from  having  the  Clergy  brought 
under  a  flricter  Difcipline  ?  "  What  the  Danger," 
in  giving  an  Opportunity  to  fuch  as  are  defirous  of 
Confirmation,  to  receive  it  in  this  Country  ?  Thefe 
are  the  only  Ends  propofed  by  an  Epifcopate ;  and 
every  Epifcopalian*  muft  allow  that  thefe  are  real 
Advantages.     And  fmce  the  Power  of  American 
*  Bilhops  is  to  be  confined  to  the  Clergy  of  our  own 

Church,  and  will  bring  no  Burthen  or  Expence 
upon  any  Part  of  the  Country,  or  upon  Individu- 
als ;  it  is  inconceivable  that  any  Epifcopalians 
Ihould  not  defire  it,  excepting  fuch  clerical  Delin- 
quents as  fear,  by  Means  of  fuch  an  Epifcopate,  to 
be  brought  to  Punifhment.    For  my  Part,  I  have 

met 


DEFENDED.  201 

met  with  no  fuch  Epifcopalians,  nor  have  partku-  ^^^^T* 
/^r/y  heard  of  any  fuch  :  But  on  the  other  Hand,  I  ^  ' 
have  been  told  by  many  of  the  DifTenters,  and  by 
feveral  of  their  Clergy,  and  even  by  fome  of  their 
Clergy  belonging  to  New- England,  thzt  they  thought 
it  unreafonable  that  any  ihould  obje6t  to  our  Propo- 
fal. 

I  MEET  with  nothing  farther  worthy   of  Notice^' 
after  what  has  been  already  animadverted  on,  until 
we  come  to  p.  138.  The  Dodtor  there  objedls  to  our 
Plan,  becaufehe  thinks  it  has  been  illegally  fettled. 
He  takes  it  for  granted,  that  what  has  been  done  by 
our  Friends  and  Superiors  at  Home  relating  to  it,  has 
been  done  without  the  King's  Approbation.  And  he 
argues  that  it  is  inconfiftent  with  the  Conftitution  of 
the  Church,  and  the  eftabhfhedDodtrine  of  xh^Kmg^s 
Supremacy,  to  take  fuch  a  Step  •,  arid  that  even  the 
Convocation,  when  convened  by  the  King's  IVrit^ 
hath  no  Authority  to  fettle  any  Plan  without  his  Con- 
fent,  nor  indeed  fo  much  as  to   attempt  to  form 
one  without  his  Licence.     What  the  Rights  and 
Powers  of  an  EngliJI:>  Convocation  are,  is  not  my 
Bufmefs  to  enquire  ',  as  it  is  not  pretended  that  the 
Plan  in  Quefcion  was  fettled  in  Convocation.    Al- 
lowing that  the  two  Houfes  of  Convocation,  ac- 
cording to  the  Declaration  of  the  upper  Houfe  in 
1702,  as  quoted  by  the  Do6lor,  "  without  a  royal 
Licence,  have  no  Authority  to  attempt,  enadl, 
promulge,  or  execute  any  Canon  by  whatever 
Name  it  might  be  called,"  which  i5  the  Lan- 
guage of  the  Statute  of  the  25  Hen,  VIII ;  yet  not- 
withflanding,  the  Clergy,  even  in  Convocation,  "  are 
"  ftillih  feveral  inferior  Inftances,  left prefe(5lly  free*." 
The  two  Houfes  of  Parliament^  cannot,  without  a 

D  d  royal 

*  uitterburyt  Rights ,  &C.  of  an  Englijh  Conv9((Ui9ni  p.  Ij;^. 
3ee  alfo  JVah's  $taU  of  the  Churcbp  p,  $5, 


cc 


202  THE   APPEAL 

Sect,  royal  Licence,  attempt,  enadl,  promiilge  of  e^ce- 
■  cute  any  Statute^  more  legally  than  the  two  Houfes 
of  Convocation  can  enad  a  Canon  •,  but  I  hope  the 
Members  both  of  Parliament  and  Convocationy 
whether  legally  convened,  or  not  convened,  as  they 
happen  to  meet  with  one  another,  may  confer  upon 
and  propofe  Plans  for  the  public  Good,  and  agree 
to  carry  them  into  Execution,  as  foon  as  the  royal 
Licence  lliall  permit  them  to  a6t  in  their  legifla-- 
tive  Capacity.  Every  AfTociation  of  difaffe5fed' 
Perfons  ought  to  be  fuppreffed  5  but  Confultations 
for  the  public  Happinefs,  held  by  Perfons  of  the 
utmoll  Fidelity,  v/ith  a  due  Deference  and  Sub-' 
miffion  to  the  Wifdom  of  Government^  will  always 
be  encouraged  by  prudent  Princes,  and  under  wife 
Adminiftrations.  If  nothing  farther  than  this, 
could  be  faid  in  Favor  of  thofe  who  fettled  the 
Plan  for  an  Amtrkan  Epifcopate^  it  would  be  fuf- 
ficient  to  juftify  them :  And  the  Dodlor  would 
have  no  Reafon  to  cry  out,  as  he  does,  p.  139^  in 
the  following  fupercilious  Language  :  Is  this  Man- 
Tier  of  Condu5f^  in  any  Degree^  conformable  to  the 
^oyifiituted  Order  of  the  Church  of  England  ?  Dare 
Bijhops^  or  even  Archhifhops^  at  home^  venture  upon 
a  Method  of  ailing  fo  repugnant  to  the  Supremacy 
.  in  all  ecclejiafiical  Matters^  with  which,  by  repeated 
A'5ls  of  Parliament,  the  Crown  has  been  vejied  ? 
That  he  is  much  rfiiftaken  in  his  Notion  of  the 
King's  Supremacy,  as  maintained  by  the  Church 
of  England,  has  been  already  proved  -,  that  he  is 
alfo  miftaken  in  his  Notion  of  the  general  conftituted 
Order  of  that  Church,  is  too  plain  to  require  any 
Proof. 

He  has  pronounced  all  Confultations  of  our 
Bilhops  for  the  Intcreft  of  Religion,  to  be,  in  ge- 
neral. 


DEFENDED.  203 

«cra!,  an  Infringement  of  the  King's  Supremacy,  Sect. 
imlefs  a  Licence  for  that  Purpofe  is  formally  grant-  ^  ^* 
cd  by  the  Crown.  But  can  any  Man  believe  this 
to  be  true,  in  the  Senfe  wherein  it  is  affirmed  ;  and 
without  any  Exceptions  ?  Suppofmg  the  King  were 
made  acquainted  with  the  particular  Subjedl  of 
any  fuch  Deliberation,  and  privately  confulted  upon 
it,  and  he  fhould  give  undoubted  Proofs  of  his 
Approbation  of  the  Meafure  -,  would  the  Doctor 
flill  call  it  an  Infringement  ot  the  Supremacy  ?  If 
not,  neither  fhoulj  he  thus  fpeak  of  the  Plan  in 
Qiieflion,  as  it  has  been  honored  in  this  Manner, 
with  the  royal  Approbation,  And  here  it  may  be 
proper  to  explain  what  has  been  before  faid  ;  name- 
ly, that  the  Plan  was  fettled  by  thofe,  who  were 
warranted  by  a  royal  CommifTion  conftitutionally 
iflued.  The  Charter  granted  to  the  Society  for  the 
propagation  of  the  Gofpel^  has  the  Nature  and  Ef- 
ficacy of  a  royal  Commiflion.  By  this  Charter  or 
CommifTion,  the  Members  are  warranted  to  concert 
Meafures  and  to  fettle  Plans^  for  carrying  on  the 
Defign  of  their  Incorporation  in  the  mofl  effeclual 
Manner.  The  Society  foon  faw,  that  an  American 
Epifcopate  was  highly  expedient  to  this  Purpofe ; 
they  therefore  fketched  out  a  general  Plan  for  fend* 
ing  Bifhqps  to  America^  which  Plan  was  publickly 
approved  and  patronized  by  her  Majcfty,  Queen 
^NNE.  Many  Caufes  concured  to  delay  the  Exe- 
cution of  it,  at  that  Time,  and  through  the  Two 
fucceeding  Reigns  -,  but  Marks  of  the  royal  Appro* 
bation  were  not  wanting  in  either  of  them.  Of 
late  Years  the  Plan  has  been  refumed  and  digefted 
with  peculiar  Attention,  and  our  prefent  maii 
gracious  Sovereign  has  given  it  particular  EncouragCr 
ment.  Surely^  after  this  Explanation  the  Doctor 
will  not  fay,  a  Plan  for  an  Epifcopate  thus  formd.^ 

D  d  a         '  fettled 


ao4  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  fettled  and  puhlijhed^  ought  to  have  no  great  Regard 
'^^'  paid  to  it.     For  were  it  inconfiderable  in  itfelf,  it 

is  ftill   refpeftable  on  Account  of  its   honorable 

Origin. 

In  p.  140,  he  goes  on,  fulminating  againfl  the 
Audacioufnefs  of  thofe  Perfons,  who  ventured  to 
form  and  encourage  the  Plan  •,  and  (Rifum  tenea- 
tis  F)  conilrues  it  to  be  a  dire^  Violation  of  the 
73d  Canon.  The  Canon  injoins,  '^  that  no  Priefts^ 
*'  or  Miniflers  of  God's  Word,  nor  any  other 
*'  Perfons  fhall  meet  together  in  any  private  Houfe, 
*'  or  elfewhere,  to  confult  upon  any  Matter  or 
**  poUrfe  to  be  taken  by  them,  or  upon  their  Mo- 
*'  tion,  or  Diredion  by  any  others,  which  may  any 
*'  "Way  tend  to  the  impeaching^  or  depraving  of  the 
*'  Dodbrine  of  the  Church  of  England^  or  of  the 
*'  Book  of  Common-Prayer,  or  of  any  Part  of  the 
*'  Government  or  Difcipline  now  eftablifhed  in  the 
*'  Church  of  England^  under  Pain  of  Excommu- 
**  nication  ipfo  Fa^fo'^  Whoever  knows  any  Thing 
of  the  Hiftory  of  the  Times  in  which  the  Canon 
was  frarned,  muft  be  fenfible  that  it  was  deftgned 
againft  a  very  different  Sort  of  Perfons  from  thofe 
venerable  Prelates,  who  formed  and  fettled  the 
Plan  for  an  American  Epifcopate.  And  as  it  was 
defigned  againft  a  different  Sort  of  Perfons,  fo  the 
Words  of  it  clearly  point  out  a  very  different  Con- 
dndl.  I  know  not  but  the  Dodlor  may  laugh  at 
me,  {ov  ferioujly  replying  to  what  is  evidently  in  it- 
felf fo  highly  extravagant^  I  might  rather  fay^  to  a 
great  Degree  ludicrous  -,  but  yet  I  am  really  unable 
to  determine,  whether  he  was,  or  was  not,  ferious 
himfelf,  at  the  Time  of  his  writing.  However,  on 
the  favorable  Suppofition  that  he  was  ferious,  as  I 
f  rcfume  he  ought  to  have  been,  I  will  proceed  to  ob- 

ferve, — 


DEFENDED,  20^ 

icrve,^ — That  what  the  Canon  condemns,  are  fac-  Sect. 
tious  Combinations  and  Confultations  which  tend  ^^^* 
to  impeach  and  deprave  the  Doctrine,  Liturgy  or 
Government  of  the  Church  of  England.  If  there- 
fore the  forming  of  the  Plan  for  an  American  Epis- 
copate has  no  fuch  Tendency,  it  comes  not  within 
the  JVdrds^  any  more  than  within  the  Intent  of  the 
Canon, 

But,  fays  the  Do6lor,  it  is  a  Plan  for  altering 
the  Government  and  Bifcipline  of  the  Church  of  Eng* 
land  in  the  Colonies.  Does  he  then  believe  the  Ca- 
non was  intended  to  fecure  the  Government  and 
Difcipline  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Co- 
lonies ?  Without  this  Intention,  the  Propofal  of 
any  Alteration  of  the  Form  of  ecclefiaftical  Go- 
vernment here,  can  be  no  Violation  of  the  Canon. 
But  what  is  the  Nature  and  Tendency  of  the  Alte- 
ration propofed  ?  Is  it  to  deprave  the  Government 
!of  the  Church  of  England  at  Home  ?  No,  it  is  in 
Reality  to  honor  it,  by  endeavoring  to  bring  the 
Government  of  the  Church  here  much  nearer  to 
her  Pattern  and  Example,  than  it  is,  or  can  be, 
while  deftitute  of  Bifliops.  Nor  is  the  Plan  for  a 
different  Mode  of  an  Epifcopate  for  the  Church  of 
America,  any  Impeachment  of  that  under  which  it 
exifts  in  England.  As  to  fuch  Externals,  the 
Church  of  England  has  always  allowed  them  to  be 
Things  that  are  alterable,  and  that  they  ought  to 
be  altered,  according  to  the  Circumftances  and 
Opinions  of  different  Countries^  or  even  of  the  fame 
Country  in  different  Ages.  To  fay  therefore  that 
Circumftances  in  America  require,  or  make  it  ex- 
pedient, that  the  Externals  of  an  Epifcopate  lliould 
be  under  a  Regulation  peculiar  to  this  Country,  is 
laying  no  more  than  the  Church  of  England  has 

always. 


2o6  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,   always,  in  EfFcdl,  faid    and  implies  no  Refle^tioft     i 
^•"^*    upon  the  Eilablifhment  at  home,  which  alfo  may      ' 
be  bed  fitted  for  a  Church  fituated  as  the  national 
Church  is  in  England. 

In  p.  141,  theDoflor,  although  he  is  of  Opi- 
nion that  he  might  be  reafonably  excufed  from  taking 
cny  farther  Notice  of  this  Plan,  as  it  is^  not  only 
deftitiite  of  all  Authority,  hut  cotnes  handed  to 
Consideration,  in  evident  Contradiction  to  it ;  yet, 
upon  the  whole,  thinks  proper  to  go  on,  and  dif 
tin5lly  mention  the  Obje5lions  we  have,  fays  he,  t9 
make  againft  it.  Here  then  the  mofl  efTential  Bu- 
fmefs  of  his  Publication  comes  forward  ;  in  which, 
he  not  only  lays  out  his  own  Strength,  but  calls  in 
to  his  Aid  what  was  pov/erfully  offered  by  the  late 
excellent  Dr,  May  hew.  His  own  Objediions  he  ^ 
diftinguiflies,  ranges  and  numbers,  as  follows. 

Object,    i.  THE  Governmeiit  and  Difcipline  of 
the  Church  of  England  under  the  propofed  American 
Epifcopate,  is  injurious,  both  to  the  Church,  and  the 
.       Bifhops  that  are  to  prefide  over  it.     But  how  is   it 
injurious  to  the  Church  1  Why,  it  feems,  by  the 
Limitation  of  the  Bifhops  Authority  to  the  Clergy, 
fo  that  it  jfhall  not  operate  on  the  Laity.  But  if  the 
Laity  are  not  to  be  affefted  by  the  Bifhops  Autho- 
rity, they  are  certainly  not  to  be  injured  by  it ;  that 
which  does  not  operate  at  all,  producing  no  Effe6b, 
either  injurious  or  beneficial.     With  Regard  there-    J| 
fore  to  the  Exercife  of  Difcipline  over  the  Laity,  j| 
no  Benefit  is  propofed,  and  no  Injury  is  to  be  fear-  ™ 
^d  •,  but  with  Regard  to  the  Government  of  the 
^l^^^gy?    much  Advantage  is  propofed,  expe61:ed 
and  forefeen  -,  fo    that  in  this  Refped:,  and  upon 
the   whole,    the    Plan  is    not   injurious,  but    be- 
neficial, to  the  American  Church.  Why  no  farther 
-?  Difcipline 


D  E  F  E  N  D  E  D.  ^oj 

Dilcipline  Is  to  be  exercifed  over  the  Laity  when  Sect. 
Bifhops  fhall  be  appointed,  has  been  fhewn  in  a  ^^* 
former  Sedlion,  and  need  not  be  repeated  here.  It 
is  thought  by  much  better  Judges  than  either  the 
Dodlor  or  myfelf,  that  it  will  be  more  advantageous 
to  the  American  Church,  to  leave  the  Laiiy  as  they 
are,  than  to  introduce  any  Degree  cr  Species  of 
Difcipline  over  them,  with  which  Americans  are 
unacquainted. 

The  propofed  Plan  is  reprefented  as  injurious  to 
the  Biffjops  themfelves,  becaufe  thereby  they  are^  in 
a  meer  arbitrary  Manner^  retrained  in  the  Exercife 
of  that  Authority^  which  properly  belongs  to  them, 
hoth  by  the  apcftolic  Appointment^  and  the  Ccnfiitu- 
Hon  of  the  Church  of  England^  p.  143.  But  if  fuch 
a  Reflraint"  is  not  injurious  to  the  Church,  it  will 
be  difHcult  to  prove  that  it  can  be  injurious  to  the 
Bifhops.  Are  v/e  to  confider  the  Authority  of 
Bifhops  as  fo  much  private  Property^  which  belongs 
to  them,  and  every  Limitation  of  it  as  fo  much 
Damage  fuflained  by  the  Bifhops  ?  And  yet,  unlels 
we  confider  it  under  fome  fuch  Idea,  I  fee  not  how 
it  can  be  made  out,  that  any  prudent  Reftraints  of 
their  Authority  can  be  an  Injury  to  them.  He  that 
is  fond  of  exercifing  Power  for  the  Sake  of  exer- 
cifing  it,  without  regarding  v/hether  it  tends  to  E- 
diiication  or  Deftrudion,  is  unworthy  of  it. 

'  Object.  2.  'THE  Bifhops  in  this  Plan^  are  fo 
*yoidely  different  from  the  Bifhops  of  the  Church  of 
England^  that  it  is  not  reafonable  they  fhculd  either 
he  defired^  or  fent^  p.  144.  The  Bifhops  in  this 
Plan,  are  efientially  the  fame  with  the  Bifliops  at 
Home,  how  v;idely  foever  they  may  differ  in  fome 
CircumflaDces,   But  let  thera  be  never  fo  different, 

if 


2o9  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  if  fuch  Bifhops  as  are  propofed  are  fitter  for  the 
*  ^*   Colonies  than  fuch  Biihops  as  are  in  England,  and 
the  Dodtor  will  hardly  fay  that  they  are  not  -,  then, 
it  may  be  reafonable  that  they  Ihould  be  both  de- 
iired,  and  fent.     This  I  take  to  be  a  full  and  fuf- 
ficient  Anfwer  to  the  Objeftion  as  it  (lands  ;  and 
what  has  been  before  faid,  I  take  to  be  a  fufficient 
Anfwer  to  all  the  Doctor  has  offered  under  this 
Head,    excepting  one  Confideration,   in  p.   146^ 
which  may  require  more  particular  Notice.     The 
Confideration  is  this  :  That  //  Bijhops  JJjould  he  fent. 
to  the  Colonies  with  thefe  rejlrained  Powers^  undefirahle 
Confequences  might  he  naturally  fear  ed^hoth  her  e^  and  at 
home.  The  Confequence  to  be  feared  here,  he  tells 
us,  is,  that  our  Billiops  would  be  uneafy  under  fuch 
a  Reftraint,  and  he  difpofed  to  throw  it  off  as  foon  as 
might  he.  But  was  it  ever  before  offered  as  a  Reafon 
why  exorbitant  Power  fhould  not  be  limited,  (and 
fuch  the  Dodor  eftecms  to  be  the  Power  of  Bifhops 
in  England)  becaufe  the  Perfons  curtailed  would  en- 
deavor to  throw  off  the  Reflraint,  as  foon  as  may 
be  ?  But  why  are  we  to  fuppofe,  that  the  American 
Bifhops  will  be  uneafy  under  fuch  a  Limitation  of 
their  Power,  as  the  Plan  fpecifies  ?  Thofe  who  have 
been  in  adlual  PoflefTion,  or  even  in  Expeftation, 
of  any  great  and  extenfive  Power,  will  naturally 
be  uneafy  under  any  remarkable  Abridgment  of  it  ♦, 
but  this  will  not  be  the  Cafe  of  our  American  Bi* 
Ihops.     Whatever  Powers  or  Privileges  they  fhall 
once  poifefs,  by  Virtue  of  their  Office,  they  will 
continue  to  hold,  as  long  as  they  fhall  remain  in  the 
Office ;  and  as  they  will  know  the  Terms  before 
they  accept  of  it,  there  can  be  no  Difappointment. 
And  why  ihould  they  be  uneafy,  becaufe  the  Bifhops 
at  home  are  invefled  with  civil  Authority  ?  The  Bi- 
fhops  at  home  may  as  properly  be  uneafy  and  refl- 

lefs. 


DEFENDED.  209 

lefs,  becaufe  they  are  not,  like  fome  of  their  Or-   Sect. 
der  On  the  Continent  of  Europe^  fovereign  Princes.    ^ 
Perhaps  the  Uneafinefs  of  the  American  Bifhops 
may  be  fuppofed  to  arife  from  the  Refledion,  that 
deftitiite  as  they  are  of  civil  Power,  they  are  Bi- 
fliops  of  the  fame  Church  with  their  Brethren  in 
England.     But  they  will  not  be  able  to  avoid  the 
farther  Reflection,    that  they  are  Billiops  of  the 
fame  Church  in  different  Countries^  and  under  dif- 
ferent  Circumftances  ;  which  eflentially  alters  the 
Cafe.     And  no  better  Reafon  can  be  given,  why 
they  Ihould  not  be  contented  with  lefs  Power  than 
belongs  to  the  Bifhops  in  England^  than  why  the 
other  Bifhops  in  England  fhould  not  be  contented 
with  lefs  Power  than  belongs  to  the  Bifhop  of  Bur- 
ham.    This  fame  Kind  of  reafoning  would  operate 
as  flrongly  againfl  epifcopal  Clergymen  in  America, 
as  againft  Bifhops.    The  Clergy  of  the  Church  of 
England^  at  home,  are,  in  a  great  Meafure,  fupported 
by  Tythes  \  therefore,  it  may  be  faid,  if  Clergymen 
of  the  Church  of  England  are  once  admitted  in 
this  Country,  under  whatever  ReftriCtions  and  Li- 
mitations, they  will  not  be  eafy,  until  they  fhall 
have  fecured  to  themfelves  the  Tythes  of  our 
Eflates. 

The  Dcxflof  alfb  nientions  Two  ill  Confequen- 
ces  to  be  feared  at  Home :  One  is,  that  the  Peo- 
ple there  who  diflike  the  prefent  Power  of  the  Bi- 
fhops, will  be  apt  to  be  clamorous,  and  to  make 
Difturbances,when  theyihall  find  that  anEpifcopate 
is  fettled  here  in  the  Form  that  they  defire,  while 
they  are  refufed  the  like  Indulgence  in  England. 
The  Reader  can  hardly  avoid  remarking,  that 
here,  and  in  many  other  Places,  the  Dodtor  forgetr 
his  proper  Bufmels  and  Character,  His  Bufinefs  is 

Eg  te 


2  19.  TH,E    APPEAL 

Sect. ^ to  anfwer  thc  Jppeal  upon  the  Principles^  of  the- 
^^'^  Difienters;.  but  inrxad  of  this,  he  frequently  en- 
deavpurs  to  raife  DifEculties  and  Objections,  which 
cannot  prop^y  be  made  but  upon  Principles  op- 
pofite  to  his  own,  and  of  thofe  v/hom  he  reprefents . 
in  this   Controverfy.     This  fhews  the  Difpofition: 
with  which  he  undertook  to  oppofe  the  Epi-fcopate 
ill  ,(>ueilion,  and  that  he   came  prepared  with  a 
Ilefolu.tion  to  objed:  at  any  Rate^  rather  than  not 
to  objed;  at  all.    It  will  never  be   admitted ^  as.  art 
Objection  coming  from  the  DijJ'enters  here  or    in; 
iLnglajid^  that  many  at  Home  will  grow  rnore  cla- 
morous  againft  the  prefent  Power  of  the  Englijh 
Biihops,  in  Confequence  of  the  Settlem^ent  of  fuch 
an  Epifcopate  here  as  is  propofed  for  the  Colonies. 
But  fhould  the   Obje(5lion   be  made  by  any  who 
have  a.  Right  to  make  it,  it  is  fuiiicient  to  refer 
them  to.  what  has  been,  already  faid  to  the  Purpofe, 
viz,..  That  fuch  an  Epifcopate  may  be  erected  here 
witli  Eafe  j -but:  i-t  cannot  be  effected  in  England^ 
without  fuSvertihg  an  Eftablilliment,  and  making 
a  very  vifible  Alteration  in   the  national.  Conftitu- 
lion— a  Vv'ork  never  to  be  undertaken   but  in  thc 
greatefh  Extrepiity,  and  even  then,  not  witho.ut  a 
tremblino;  Eland.  ' 

The  other  ill  Confeauence  fugrgefted  is,  that 
ie  Bi{liopS;jn  England  v/ill  be  jealous,  that  an 
Invafion  of  their  Authority  is  farther  intended.  In 
Reply  to  which,  I  will  only  remind  the  Do6lor  of 
one  Circumflance  v/liich  he  happened  to  forget  ; 
namely,  that  this  very  Plan  has  been  formed  and 
introduced  by  thofe  Bifhops  themfelves,  and  con- 
fequently,  fhould  they  be  jealous  that  any  Invafion  of 
;their  Power  is"  therein  intended,  they  muft  be  jea- 
'^  bus  that  they  have  intended  to  invade  it  themfelves. 

Object, 


DEFENDED.  2it 

Object.  3.  THE  Church  of  .England  Inoivs  710  Sect. 
fuch  Bifbops  as  are  fpecified  m  this  Pian^  Vior  can  they    ^^^'^' 
in  Ccnfijhncy  with  its  Conftitution^  he  fent  to  the  Cc- 
lonies^  p.  149.     This  Objection,  and  all  that  has 
been  oiTered  to  fupport  it,  has  been  fully  anfwered 
already. 

Object.  4.  TVE    are^  in  Principle^    againft  all 
€tvil  Eftablijhments  in  Religion  ;  and  as  ive  do  not 
defire  any  fuch  Eflahlifhment  in  Support  of  our  own 
religious  Sentiments^  or  Practice^  we  cannot  reafonahly 
he  blamed^  if  we  are  not  difpofed  to  encourage  one  in 
■Favor  of  the  epif copal  Colonifts^  p.  152.     If  by  we, 
the  Do6lor  means  thofe  of  the  congregational  Per- 
fuafion  in  New-England  in  general,  the  Objeflion 
contains  an  Article  of  Intellicrence  that  is  to   me 
NEW.   Thatfome  particular  Writers  among  the  va- 
rious Denominations  of  DilTenters,   both  in  Ensf- 
,land  and  in  this  Country,  have  exprefied  a  Difiike 
of  all  religious  Efta.blilhm.enrs,  I  well  know^,  but 
I  have  been  of  Opinion,  that  a  large  Ma]orlty  of 
thofe  feveral  Perfiiafions,  excepting  the  People  cal- 
led   Quakers,    notv/ithfcanding  the    Declamations 
that  have  been  publifhed  againfc  Eflablifliments  iTi 
the  grofs,  had  alv/ays  a  Referve  in  Favor  of  the 
Eftabhfhment  of  their  own  Religion.    The  Puri- 
tans, in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  "  did  not 
*'  defire   a  Toleration,    but   the   EftahlifJmcnt  of 
^^  their  own  Scheme ;  fuch  an  Eflablilhm.en-:  of  it 
*'  as  would  have  kept  all  others,  in  particular  the 
''  Lutherans,  and  the  Friends  of  Edward's  Refor- 
mation, out  of  the  Church  -,  and  as  they  did  not 
defire  a  Toleration  for  themfelves,  fo  they  would 
not  grant  it  to  others.     The  full  Eftablifhment 
of  their  own  Plan,  abfolute  and  univei'fal  Cotri- 
^-f  pliance  with  it,  without  any  Favor  or  Indulgence, 

E  e  2  •  -••'^•'^•v/as 


«( 


C(. 


^12  r    THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  «  was  what  they  wrote  for,  and  earneftly  cndea- 
Vm.  u  voured  to  obtain*."  In  the  laft  Century,  when 
they  were  able  to  feize  upon  the  Power  of  the  State, 
they  preffed  it  into  their  Service,  and  according  to 
the  Dodrine  of  their  Fathers,  an  Eftablijhmeni 
without  a  Toleration  was  urged  and  pradiced,  a$ 
a  Matter  of  indifpenfible  Duty.  The  Do<5lor*s  An- 
ceftors  and  mine,  who  planted  themfelves  in  New- 
England,  brought  with  them  the  fame  Principles ; 
upon  which  they  made  farther  Improvements,  not 
fuffering  even  thofe  of  their  own  Perfuafion,  except 
they  were  in  full  Communion  with  them,  to  enjoy 
fome  of  the  moft  eflfential  Rights  of  Englilhmen. 
The  Prefbyterians  in  Scotland,  and  the  Calvinifts 
in  Geneva,  Holland  and  other  Places,  have  al- 
ways been  Friends  to  religious  Eftablilhments,  and 
ftrenuous  Advocates  for  the  Magiftrate's  Protedi- 
on  of  the  true  Religion,  And  I  imagine,  froni 
certain  hiftorical  Accounts  and  authentic  Apecdotes 
in  my  PofTeflion,  that  it  muft  have  been  within  a 
very  few  Years  only,  that  the  Doftor's  Principle, 
againft  all  civil  Efiahlijhments  in  Religion^  has  been 
generally  adopted  in  New-Engbnd,  if  it  has  been 
adopted  at  all. 

I  iNTiRELY  agree  with  him,  that  if  he,  and  thofe 
of  his  Perfuafion,  do  not  defire  an  EftaUiJhment  in 
Support  of  their  own  religious  Sentiments^  they  can-' 
not  reafonahly  he  blamed^  if  they  are  not  difpofed  to 
inccurage  one  in  Favor  of  the  epifcopal  Colonijis, 
They  are  not  defired  to  do  this ;  nay,  when  it  fball 
appear  that  the  American  Epifcopalians  ende^our 
to  introduce  any  fartherEftablifhment  of  the  Church 
in  the  Colonies,  than  it  now  has,  I  will  not  blame 
them  if  they  oppofe  it,  provided  the  Oppofltion  be 

made 

*  Maddox^  Anfwer  to  Neal^  p..  iio. 


DEFENDED. 

made  fairly^  and  they  confine  themfelves  within 
the  Limits  of  I'rutb^  Candor  and  Decency,  After 
all,  what  has  the  Cafe  of  religious  Eilablifhments  to 
do  with  the  Plan  for  an  American  Epifcopate,  which 
has  been  offered  to  the  Public  ?  Does  this  Plan 
propofe  an  Eftahlijhment  of  the  Church  ?  Will  the 
Execution  of  it  imply,  or  amount  to,  any  fuch 
Thing  ?  Will  the  Introduction  of  Bifhops,  who 
fhail  have  no  Authority,  but  purely  of  a  fpiritu- 
al  and  ecclefiaftical  Nature,  fuch  as  is  derived 
altogether  from  the  Church  and  not  from  the 
State' — whofe  *  Authority  fhall  operate  only  upon 
the  Clergy  of  the  Church,  and  not  upon  the  Laity, 
nor  upon  Diflenters  of  ^ny  Denomination' — 
who  '  Ihall  not  interfere  with  the  Property  or 
Privileges,  whether  civil  or  religious,  of  Church- 
men or  Diflenters'— who  *  in  particular,  fhall 
have  no  Concern  with  the  Probate  of  Wills,  Let- 
ters of  Guardianfhip  and  Admiriiftration,  or 
Marriage-Licences,  nor  be  Judges  of  any  Cafes 
relating  thereto' — but  who  *  ihall  only  exercife 
the  original  Powers  of  their  Office,  /.  e.  ordain 
and  govern  the  Clergy,  and  adminifler  Confir- 
matipn  to  thofe  who  fhall  defire  it ;'  I  fay,  will 
the  Introdudion  of  fuch  Bifhops  as  thefe  (and  no 
Others  are  propofed  in  the  Plan,  or  intended  by  its 
Advocates)  amount  to  an  Eftablifhment  ?  Nay, 
can  it  have  any  more  Effeft  againil  the  civil  or  re- 
ligious Privileges  of  the  Colonifls,  than  againfl 
thofe  of  the  Crim  Tartars  ?  If  not  •,  then  whatever 
has  been  offered  upon  this  Subjed  in  Anfwer  to  the 
Plan,  by  the  Doctor  or  others,  and  much  }ias  been 
offered  by  all  that  have  written  againft  it,  is  abfo- 
lutely  foreign  from  the  Point,  and  has  90  Manner 
of  Connexion  with  it. 


THE    APPEAL 

For  tliis  Reafon  I  fhall  pafs  over  V/hat  is  faid^  in 
p.  153,  about  the  general  i^ig-^^  of  States  to  make 
'religious  Eftablifh merits,  with  this  Obfervation  ; 
that  the  fame  Argument,  with  which  the  Do6lof 
endeavours  to  overthrow  it,  is  as  forcible  againft 
the  Right  of  private  Judgment.  This  will  evident- 
iy  appear  from  the  following  Experiment.  If  a 
■Perfon  in  England  has  this  Kight^  muft  it  not  be 
czvned,  that  a  Perfon  in  China:,  in  'Twkey^  in  Spain^ 
has  this  Right  alfo  ?  What  Jhotild  make  the  Differ- 
tnce  in  the  Eye  of  true  Reafon  ?  Have  Perfons  ■  in 
England  been  diftingiiifjjed  by  Heaven  by  any  peculiar 
Grants  beyond  Perfons  in  other  Countries'?  If  they 
have,  let  the  Grant  be  produced.  If  they  have  not^ 
all  Perfons  have^  in  common^  the  fame  Right.  And 
(IS  they  muft  feverally  be  fuppofed  to  exert  this  Right, 
in  forming  their  own  Sentiments  in  Religion  ;  what  can 
the  Confec^uence  be^  but  infinite  Damage  to  the  Caufe  of 
God  and  true  Religion  ?  And  fuch  in  Fa5l  has  been  the 
Confequence  of  thispretendedRight  of  priV^/^J//^^- 
mentjn  all  Ages.,and  in  all  Places.  What  Abfurdities  in 
■Sentiment ^  and  ridiculous  Follies.,  not  tofay^^grofs  Immo- 
ralities in  Pra^ice.,  have  been  occafioned  by  the 
Exercife  of  this  Right,  in  fome  or  other  Nations  of 
the  Earth  ?  Thus  the  Reader  fees  the  Force  of  the 
Dodlor's  Argument  againft  Eftablilhments  •,  if  he 
choofes  to  fee  what  can  be  faid  in  Favor  of  them, 
let  him  confult,  among  other  Authors,  Bilhop 
Warburton'j  Alliance  between  the  Church  and  the 
State,  Dr.  Stebbing'j  Effay  concerning  civil  Govern- 
ment, Dr.  Rogers'^  Vindication  of  the  civil  Efta- 
hlifhment,  Bifhop  Ellys  on  fpiritual  Liberty,  Tra6t 
III,  and  a  late  elegant  Effay  on  Eftablifhments  in 
Religion,  in  Anfwer  to  the  CofeffionaL 

Object, 


DEFENDED.  215 

'Object.  5.  ^HE  .Church  ,  of  .England  in  thd^^^^'^-i 
Colonies^  in  its  comparative  low  Stat e.^  inftead  of  an    ^^''^ 
Epfcopats^  upo?i  this.Plan^  or  any  other ^  needs  ra- 
ther the  charitable  Affifianee  of  its  Friends  to  fupport     ^    ' 
itsp'efent  Minifters^  and  others  that  are^flill  wanted^ 
p;  154^    The  Dodor  forgets,  that  t:h"fe  Church  of 
ifingland  in  feveral  of  the.  Cqlonies,  is-  riot  in  that 
comparative  low  State  k^  here  fpeaks'  of;  but  is  able 
to  fupport  and  floes  lupport,  its .Minifters  in  general, 
asarpplyasanySetQf  Giergymen  arefupported  in  the 
Britifh- Dominions.  But  fuppofmg  it  w.ere,cthenwifev 
and  that  the  Church  throughout  theCpJenies  need- 
ed the  charitable  JJfiflance.  of,  its  FrMnds.-.ti)  fupport 
its  MinifterSy  as  is  alTumed  in- tJi€,.Gbje6iion  v  yec 
this  would  -be.no  Proof,  that  it  does,  not  alfo  need- 
an  Epifcopate.  The^deplorable  Sadnefiof  jhe  religi- 
ous.  State  of  T'hings,  in  North-Carolinay  ^jvvhere  there 
are  fo,  few.  Clergymen^  :inilead\pf;.  anfwering  the 
Objedor's  Purpofe,  is,  on  the  contrary,  a  flrong  Ar-" 
gument  t9  prove  tl;^;lsleGe;irity;of  itoifi^can  Bi&^ 


n,». 


BU^^  fays  he,  that  Charity^  which  might  be  fuf- 

ficient  for  the  Maintenance  of  as  many  Mijfionaries 

us  would  be  needful  there ^  would' be  f wallowed  up  by 

ene  Bifrjop  o?dy.     And  would  this'  fo  much  tend  to  the 

Honor  of  Gcd^  and  the  Good  of  Souk,  as  if  it  was- 

expended  in  Support  of  Mijfions  that  are  really  necef- 

fary  I  It  is  furprizing  to  fee  what  Advantages  are 

claimed  by  fome  People  ♦,  how  they  can  make  Ufe  of 

the  fame  Argument  to  contrary  Purpofes  !  When  o- 

ther  Ends  are  to  be  anfvvered,  the  Writers  againft 

the  Church  can  tell  us,  that  the  Society  have  no 

Power  to  apply  their  Fujids  to  other  Ufes  than  were 

intended  by  the  Donors— that  '-the  Money  given 

"  mud  be  looked  upon  as  (Iridly  appropriated  by 

"  the  pious  Donors  to  particular  Ufes  j  and  may 

"  not 


2i6  THE   APPEAL 

SicT.  «  not  on  any  Pretence,  be  diverted  to  other  and 
VHI.  ic  different  tjfes,  though  thofe  other  Ufes  may 
*'  feem  to  have  Something  pious  and  charitable  in 
"  their  Nature*" — that  the  Society  are  Stewards^ 
and  that  "  Stewards  are  not  allowed  to  ufe  the 
*'  Goods  or  Money  with  which  they  are  intruftcd, 
*'  but  for  thofe  Ends  and  Purpofes  for  which  they 
*'  are  committed  to  them.  If  they  knowingly  ap- 
*'  ply  them  to  any  others,  however  good  in  them- 
•*  feives,  they  are  unfaithful  in  their  Truftf ." 
But  now  an  Efpifcopate  is  in  VieWy  it  is  thought 
reafonable  and  juft,  that  the  Society  Ihould  alienate 
a  Fund,  more  ftridly  appropriated  to  a  particular 
Ufe  than  any  other  in  their  Power,  (for  this  may 
be  truly  faid  of  the  Fund  for  the  Support  of  Ame- 
rican Bifliops)  and  expend  it  upon  Miflionaries 
to  be  lent  to  Carolina,  or  other  Places,  provided 
always  that  fuch  Places  be  at  a  due  Diftance  from 
New-England,  But  as  the  Society  have  never  aded 
the  Part  of  unfaithful  Stewards  in  other  Cafes,  we 
can  be  under  no  Apprehenfions  that  they  will  in 
this. 

In^  p,  155.  the  Dodor  reprefents  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  Northern  Colonies,  as  having 
grown  but  little  in  Comparifon  with  the  other  Deno" 
minations  of  Cbriftians.  If  this  were  really  the 
Cafe,  it  would  not  be  ftrarige,  fince  it  might  na- 
turally be  accounted  for,  from  the  peculiar  Difad- 
vantes  to  which  the  Church  in  the  Colonies  has  al- 
ways been  fubjett ;  and  whether  it  is  the  Cafe  or 
not,  the  Plea  for  an  Epifcopate  is  exadly  the  fame, 
it  being  not  founded  on  the  comparative  Increafe 
on  the  Church,  but  on  its  prefent  State,  with  Ref- 

pcd 

•  Hohart*t  Second  Addrefi,  p.  117. 
t  Majhew\  Obferration,  &c.  p.  140* 


DEFENDED-  217 

fpe6l  both  to  the  Numbers  it  now  contains,  and  Sect. 
the  Neceflities  it  is  under.  But  I  conceive  he  muft 
be  millaken,    as  to  the  Fa6t*     In  Pennfylvania, 
New-Jerfey   and  New- York,  I  will  not  be  pofitive 
that  the  Church  has  increafed  beyond  the  Proporti- 
on of  other  Denominations,  for  ^o  Years  pail.  In 
fome  particular  Towns  and  Diftri6ls  it  undoubted- 
ly has,  but  perhaps  in  others  it  may  have  propor- 
tionably  decreafed.     But  in  the  New-England  Co- 
lonies, it  appears  from  good  Accounts,  that  the 
Church  has  confiderably  increafed,  and  that  the 
Number  of  its  ProfelTors  at  this  Day  bears  a  great- 
er Proportion  to  the  Number  of  Inhabitants,  than 
it  ever  has  before.  I  may  be  miflaken  with  Regard 
to  fome  of  the  New-England  Colonies  ;  but  my 
Opinion  is  founded  upon  credible  Report,  fVrength- 
ened  by    this   Argument — that   it   is    a  common 
Thing  there,  for  Families  of  DifTenters  to  conform 
to  the  Church ;  whereas  it  feldom  happens  that  a 
Family  is  known  to  leave   the  Church,  and  join 
with  the  Diffenters.     But  as   to  Connedicut,   of 
which  I  can  judge  from  my  own  Obfervation,   the 
Church  has  increafed  there  moft  amazingly,  for  20 
or  30  Years  paft.     I  cannot  at  prefent  recollecSi:  an 
Example,  in  any  Age  or  Country,  wherein  fo  great 
a  Proportion  of  Profelytes  has  been  made  to  any 
Religion  in  fo  Ihort  a  Time,  as  has  been  made  to 
the  Church  of  England  in  the  Weilern  Divifion  of 
that  populous  Colony  •,  unlefs  where  the  Power  of 
Miracles  or  the  Arm  of  the  Magiflratc  was  exerted 
to  produce   that  EiFect.      This  Progrefs   of   the 
Church  has  greatly  alarmed  the  more  rigid  DifTen- 
ters in  New-England  ;  and  however  the  good  Doc- 
tor may  affect  to  defpiie  it,  I  think  that  I   can 
difcover,  in  fome  of  his  late  Writings,  that  he  is 
not  a  little  alarmed  by  it  himfelf, 

F  f  lyj 


2i8  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.       Jn  p.  1^7,  he  intimates,  that  it  is  not  pruderrt 
yet  a  while  for  us   to  ^f/?r^  ^;/  Epifco^ate^  fmce  it 
u'///  ^^  attended  with  a   vafi  Charge^  which  mtift  he 
defrayed  ferns  W^ay  cr  other.     If  Americans  were 
to  fupport  the  Epifcopate,  and  are  not  yet  able,  it 
\V>!re  wrong  in  them,  I  will  not  fay^  to  dejire^  but 
to  reqi.ell  it.     But  this  is  not  to  be  the  Cafe.  And 
fmce  there  is  an  appropriated  Fund  for  this  Pur- 
pofe,    v/hich  will  go  far  tov/ards  defraying    the 
Charge — lince  there  is  no  Reafon  to  doubt  but  it 
will  be  fufficientiy  augmiented  by  voluntary  Dona- 
tions— and   efpecially,    fmce  the  Dodlor  and  his 
Friends  are  not  to  be  taxed  to  raife  it  to  a  fuHicien- 
cy  ',  they  have  no  Caufe  to  be  unealy  on  that  Ac- 
count.    Under  this  Head  he  arQ;ues  ao;ainil  an  E- 
pifcopate,  from  the  American  Church's  being  yet 
in  its  Infancy — in  fuch  a  feeble  State  as  not  to  be 
able  to  ftand  upon  its  own  Legs — and,  in  Ihort,  as 
being  fo  far  from  a  State  of  Maturity.,  as  not  to 
make  it  worth  while  for  a  Bifhop  to  come  here. 
But  infant  and  feeble  as  She  is,  he  has  allowed  that 
She  may  be  270,000  flrong  in  the  Colonies,  exclu- 
five  of  the  lilands,  after  reducing  her  Numbers  as 
low  as  poffible.     Now  can  he  pofTibly  think,  v/hen 
he  allows  himfelf  Time  for  Confideration,  that  the 
Church  of  England  in  America,  containing  270,00a 
IViembers  (befides  many  Thoiifands  more  in  the  I- 
flands)'in  which  are  included  moft  of  the  Gover- 
nors and  principal  Perfons  in  the  Colonies,  is  fo  in- 
confiderable,  that  it  is  not  worth  while  for  a  Bifliop 
to  take  Charge  of  it }  Would  he  look  upon  an  e- 
qual  Number  of  any  People  upon  Earth,  hov/ever 
low  in  their  Circumilances,  or  however  light  wher^ 
weighed  in  the  political  Ballance,  in  fo  contempti- 
ble a  Light  ^ 

Dr. 


DEFENDED. 

Dr.  Chauncy's  other  Ohje^rions^  it  feems,  coincide 
with  izhat  has  been  powerfull;^  offered  by  Dr.  May- 
hew  ;  he  therefore  thinks  proper  to  bring  that  pow- 
erful Objeclor  upon  the  Stage,  and  to  retire  himfelf, 
during  a  Scene  of  17  Pages.  But  before  he  makes 
this  Exit^  he  complains  that  I  fuffered  what  was 
ivrote  in  Anfwer  to  this  very  Plan^  by  Dr.  May  hew, 
to  lie  unanfwered,  v/ithout  having  lifped  a  IVord  in 
Reply  to  him.  This  Appearance  is  againfl  me,  I 
freely  confefs.  It  was  the  profefTed  Bufinefs  of  the 
Appeal  to  obviate  and  remove  Obje6lions  againfc 
an  American  Epifcopate,  and  Dr.  Mayhew  was 
too  confiderable  a  Writer  to  be  overlooked.  But 
the  Defences  of  his  Obfer-vations  I  had  not  then 
feen  ;  and  although  I  made  m.uch  Inquiry,  and 
fent  as  far  as  into  Conneflicut,  I  was  unable  to  pro- 
cure them.  I  was  told  however  by  one  that  had 
read  them,  that  they  contained  nothing  material 
upon  the  Subject,  but  what  had  been  fuiliciently 
anfwered  by  Mr.  Apthcrp^  and  nothing  but  what  I 
had  confidered  in  the  Courfe  of  my  Papers ;  upcn 
which  Information  I  proceeded  to  publifli.  This 
Excufe  I  now  offer  to  the  Public,  not  doubtino;  of 
its  being  candidly  accepted.  But  what  Excufe  can 
Dr.  Chatincy  make,  for  taking  no  Notice  of  v/hat 
YJ?iS> powerfully  offered  by  Mr.  Apthorp,  in  Anfwer 
to  thefe  very  Objedlions  of  Dr.  Mayhew,  and 
for  not  having  lifped  a  Word  in  Reply  to  him  'i  Was 
it  treating  his  Readers  generoufly,  or  fairly,  or  ho- 
neflly,  to  prefent  them  with  Dr.  Mayhevv^'s  Objec- 
tions, broadly  hinting,  although  not  directly  altert- 
ing,  that  they  had  not  been  anfwered  ♦,  when  he 
muit  have  known,  that  they  had  not  only  been  anf- 
wered, but  that  no  Reply  had  been  made  to  the 
Anfwer  ?  Unlels  fome  fatisfadory  Account  fnall 

be 


220  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,   bc  given  of  this  Condufl,  he  mull  bear  the  Re- 
^        proach  of  it,  as  v/ell  as  he  can. 

Before  he  introduces  Dr.  Mayhew,  he  fuggefts 
an  Expedient  to  comprcmife  Matters  between  Epifco- 
palians,  and  other  Denojninations,  in  the  Colonies^ 
p.  158.  The  Expedient  is,  that  the  King  jfiiould 
•  grant  a  CommilTion  to  fome  of  the  epifcopal  Cler- 
gy here,  to  perform  all  the  Offices  of  a  Bifhop. 
Every  plaufible  Expedient  for  compromifmg  Dif- 
ferences between  the  various  Denominations  of 
Chriftians,  ought  to  be  attended  to  •,  but  Plaufibi- 
iity  cannot  be  predicated  of  this.  It  can  neither 
anfwer  the  Ends  of  the  Epifcopalians,  nor  even 
thofe  of  the  Projector  and  his  Adherents.  The 
Powers  wanted  by  the  American  Church  are  '  pure- 
*  ly  of  a  fpiritual  Nature,'  \vhich  therefore  the 
King  cannot  give  ;  fuch  Authority  as  can  be  given 
by  the  King,  is  altogether  temporal^  which  is  the 
very  Thing  that  the  Diflenters  dread  :  So  that  nei- 
ther Epifcopalians  nor  Diflenters,  can  pofTibly  ac- 
quiefce  in  the  Expedient. 

I  SHALL  nov/  lay  before  the  Reader  Mr.  Ap^ 
thorp's  Reply  to  what  has  been  produced  from  Dr, 
Mayhew  on  the  Subje(5t ;  firft  begging  that  worthy 
Gentleman's  Pardon,  for  making  fo  free  with  his 
Property. 

"  The  Doftor  affefls  to  doubt,  fays  Mr.  Ap- 
thorp,  whether  the  Scheme  propofed  by  his  Anf- 
werer,  be  not  merely  his  own  -,  inftead  of  being, 
as  is  afferted,  the  real  and  only  one  that  has  been 
in  View  •,  and  fays,  that  if  this  AlTertion  be  true, 
he  and  others,  have  been  mifinformed.  Therefore, 
let  his  or  their  Informers  fay  on  what  Grounds 

they 


1 


DEFENDED.  221 

they  have  ever  affirmed  a  different  one  to  have  been  Sect. 
framed ;  or  elfe  let  them  take  Shame  to  themfelves,      ^^ 
for  inventino;  Falfhoods,  or  ventino-   Imaginations 
for  Fadls  •,  and  let  the  Dodlor  fet  a  Mark  on  them, 
and  be  more  cautious  whom  he  believes  hereafter," 

"  Successive  Propofals  for  American  Bifhops 
have  been  made  at  different  Times,  through  a  loiv~* 
Courfe  of  Years,  by  Men  of  high  Rank  and  Cha- 
Ta6Ver  in  the  Church  •,  and  are  ready  now  for  the 
Perufal  of  any  worthy  Perfon,  who  Ihall  declare 
himfelf  unfatisfied  in  this  Poin  t :  All  which  agree 
with  what  the  Anfweret'  has  avered.  One  of  them 
perhaps  may  have  peculiar  Weight  v/ith  the  Doctor  ; 
I  mean  that  made  in  the  Year  1750,  by  the  excel- 
lent Bifhop  Butler,  in  the  Dodlor's  ov/n  Judg- 
ment "  a  great  Ornament  of  the  Epifcopal  Order, 
*'  and  of  the  Church  of  England.^''  This  Scheme, 
with  which  the  Writer  was  favored  by  a  Gentleman 
of  Diftin<5lion  in  Bcfton^  is  in  the  Bijhop's  own  hand- 
writings of  which  the  following  is  an  exad:  Tran- 
fcript." 

I.  "  That  no  coercive  Power  is  defired  over 
"  the  Laity  in  any  Cafe ;  but  only  a  Power  to  re- 
*'  gulate  the  Behavior  of  the  Clergy  who  are  in 
*'  epifcopal  Orders ;  and  to  corre6l  and  punifh 
*'  them  according  to  the  Law  of  the  Church  of 
*'  England,  in  Cafe  of  Mifbehavior  or  Negle6l  of 
*'  Duty,  with  fuch  Powers  as  the  CommifTaries  a- 
"  broad  have  exercifed. 


II.  "  That  nothing  is  defired  for  fuch  Bifhops,- 
"  that  may  in  the  leaft  interfere  with  the  Dignity, 
"  or  Authority,  or  Intereft,  of  the  Governor,  or  any 
^'  other  Officer  of  State.  Probates  of  Wills,  Li- 

"  cencc 


222  T  H  E     APPEAL 

Sect.   «  ceBGC  for  Marriages,  &:c.  to  be  left  in  the  Hands 
\Ul.    cc  where  they  are  :  And  no   Share  m  the  temporal 
"  Government  is  dejired  for  Bifljo-ps. 

III.  "  'T^HE  Maintenance  of  fuch  BifJoops  not  to  he 
■*'  at  the  Charge  of  the  Colonies, 

.    IV.  "  No  Biiliops  are  intended  to  be  fettled  in 

**  Places  where  the  Government  is  in  the  Hands  of 
DiiTenters,  as  in  New-England,  &c.  But  Au- 
thority to  be  given,  only  to  ordain  Clergy  for 
fuch  Church  of  England  Congregations  as  are 
among  them,  and  to  infpect  into  the  Manners 

"  and  Behavior  of  the  faid  Clergy,  and  to  confirm 

"  the  Members  thereof." 

"  This  Plan  is  fo  exadly  fimilar  to  that  in  the 
Anfiver  to  Dr.  Mayhew'j  Ohfervations^  that  it  can- 
not be  doubted,  they  are  the  fame,  and  that  it  is 
the  pnly  one  intended  to  be  put  in  Execution.  And 
it  is  fuch  a  fnnple  and  beauiiful  Model  of  the  mofl 
ancient  and  moderate  Epifcopacy,  that  it  fhould, 
not  only  remove  all  the  Do<5i:or's  Apprehenfibns, 
but  the  Scruples  of  every  rational  and  learned 
DilTenter  againft  that  apoilolic  Form  of  Govern- 
ment.'* 

"  Supposing  this  to  be  the  real  Scheme,  the 
Potior  owns  that  it  fets  the  Matter  in  a  lefs  excep- 
tionable Point  of  View,  than  he  had  feen  it  in  be- 
fore. Yet  he  cannot  forbear  going  50  Years  back, 
to  ridicule  fome  harmlefs,  though  ill-chofen,  Phra- 
fes,  in  which  the  Subftance  of  it  is  expreifed  ;  and 
expofe  to  fcorn,  with  burlefque  Gravity,  what  he 
calls  a  Matter  ''  fo  fublime,  myflerious  and  facred, 
''  as  the  Impofition  of  the  Bifhop's  Hands."  Yet, 

he 


DEFENDED. 


223 


he  well  knows,  or  eafily  may,  that  we  afcribe  no  ^ect. 
more  Efficacy  to  the  laying  on  of  Biiliops'  Hands,    ^^^^* 
than  his  Brethren  do  to  the  laying  on  of  Prefbyters' 
Hands.      And  if  we  apprehend  ourfelves  bound 
to  admit  it  in  one  Office,  which  they  have  rejeded, 
I  mean  Confirmation  -,  we  may  indeed  be  miftaken 
in  it,  but  fureiy  cannot  be  Objects  of  Derifion  for 
it.     The  fame  is  the  Cafe  of  epifcopal  Ordination, 
and  epifcopal  Vifitation  of  the  Clergy  of  our  Church. 
We  think  them  all  appointed,  and  ufeful  to  us :  We 
are  fure  they  are  injurious  to  no  other  Perfons.  And 
therefore  according  to  thofe  Principles,  for  which 
the  Doctor  avows  the  warmed  Zeal;  we  are  en- 
titled to  have  thefe  Offices  performed  for  us   by 
Perfons    of  that   Order,    to   which   we    conceive 
they  are  committed  :  Elfe,  v/e  do  not  enjoy  "  that 
"  full  entire  Liberty  in  religious  Matters,"  which 
the  Dodlor  defires  for  himfelf,    and  "  v/hich  all 
Men,  whofe  Principles   or  Practices  are  not  in- 
confiftent  with  the  Safety  of  Society,  he  fays^ 
have  a  Right  to  enjoy."     He  tells  us  indeed, 
that  we  do  enjoy  it  without  American  Bilhops, 
*'  though  under  fome  Inconvemences^'*  as  he  gently 
calls   them.     The  Buffoonery  that   immediately 
follows,  in  Order  to  prevent  any  Compaffion  for 
our  Cafe,  I  omit.    So  he  thinks  we  are  poffefled 
fufficiently  of  the  whole  Exercife  of  our  Religion, 
becaufe  our  young  People  may  be  confirmed,  and 
Clergymen  ordained  for  us,  and  properly  inlpe6led 
afterwards  •,  provided  they  will  all  go  from  Ameri- 
ca to  Europe  for  thefe  Purpofes.     Can  the  Dodor 
"fay  with  a  good  Confcience,  that  Liberty  like  this 
is  all  that  he  fhould  defire  for  himfelf  and   his 
Brethren  ?    Let  me  intreat  him  to  read  over  again 
fome  Words  of  his  Anfiverer^  to  which  he  has 
made  no  Reply :  Whether,  becaufe  they  deferve 

none^ 


224  THE    APPEAL 

^vm*  "^^^'  ^^  becaufe  they  admit  of  none,  let  others 
^  ^'  judge.  "  The  American  DilTenters  from  our  Com- 
"  munion,  would  tliink  it  infupportably  gi"ievous 
"  to  have  no  Minifters  but  fuch  as  received  Ordi- 
*'  nation  in  England  or  Ireland  ;  or  to  be  withheld 
"  from  the  Ufe  of  any  religious  Rite^  which  they 
"  eflcemed  as  highly  as  we  do  Confirmation ;  oi^ 
■'  to  have  their  Churches  deflitute  of  a  Superintend 
*'  dency,  which  they  conceived  to  be  of  apoftoli- 
"  cal  Inflitution.  /mould  in  fuch  a  Cafe  be  a  zea- 
"  lous  Advocate  for  them,  as  not  yet  enjoying  the 
"  full  Toleration  to  which  they  had  a  Right. 
"  And  furely  they  ought  to  aflc  their  Confciences 
*'  very  feriouily,  why  they  oppofe  our  Application 
"  for  fuch  Indulgence,  as  they  would  claim  for 
"  themfelves  ;  and  v/hether  indeed  fuch  Oppofition 
"  is  not  downright  Perfecution ;  and  that,  in  a 
"  Matter  merely  fpiritual,  v/ithout  the  Mixture  of 
"  any  temporal' Concern."     J-^if.  p.  60. 

"  The  Dodor,  frill  flying  to  Ridicule  in  Defed 
of  Argument,  intimates,  how  much  the  Epif- 
copalians  in  Amaerica  need  to  be  well  ruled  and 
governed,— ho^  much  the  Clergy  need  to  be 
united,  and  reduced  to  Order.  On  which  I 
would  only  obferve,  that  the  American  Clergy  are 
known  to  be  unanimous  in  their  Wilhes  to  be  under 
the  immediate  Infpedion  of  Bifhops  refident  among 
them  :  Which  Concurrence  implies  quite  the  con- 
trary to  a  prefent  diforderly  State  of  that  Clergy  ; 
who  are  perhaps,  as  faithful  to  their  Trull,  and  as 
blamelefs  in  their  Manners,  as  any  Body  of  Men  in 
the  Chriftian  Miniflry." 

"  He  fays,  that  great  Inconveniences  are  likely 
to  follow  from   the  fending  Bifhops  to  America. 

But 


DEFENDED*  22^ 

But  he  fays  alfo,  "  It  is  readily  owned  that  our  Sect* 
"  Apprehenfion  of  what  may  poflibly  or  probably  ^^^^* 
*'  be  the  Confequences  of  it,  ought  not  to  put  us 
*'  on  infringing  the  religious  Liberty  of  our  Fel- 
"  low-Subjeds  and  Chriftian  Brethren."  Nay,  he 
adds,  "  neither  have  we  any  Power  to  do  fo  ;  if  we 
*'  were  unreafonahle  and  wicked  enough  to  defire  it ; 
*'  our  Charter  granting  fuch  Liberty  to  all  Protef- 
*'  tants^  Therefore,  Bifhops  may,  by  that  Char- 
ter, fettle  even  in  New-England.  And  if  the  having 
bifhops  among  them  be  Part  of  the  religious  Li- 
berty of  the  Epifcopalians,  as  it  evidently  is  ;  the 
DifTenters  ought  not  to  oppofe  it  on  Account  of 
apprehended  Confequences  :  Much  lefs  ought  they 
to  oppofe  the  Settleme...  of  them  in  other  Provin- 
ces, totally  independent  on  New-England ;  or  their 
reforting  to  the  New-England  Epifcopahans  occa- 
fionally.  For  any  Thing  of  this  Kind  would  be 
doing  evil  on  Pretence  that  good  may  come''"  " 


,*  " 


''  But  why  are  bad  Confequences  apprehended  ? 
**  Bifhops,  he  tells  us,  are  ambitious  arid  unquiet.** 
But  fo  are  Prefbyters,  and  all  Sorts  of  Men  too 
often.  Bifhops  partake  of  jufl  the  fame  Nature 
with  the  Reft  of  the  Species  :  And  the  Do6lor  will 
own,  that  they  are  now,  and  long  have  been,  as 
quiet  an  Order  of  Men,  as  any  in  this  Nation. 
But  who  knows  whether  they  will  continue  fo  ? 
And  who  can  know  with  Certainty  any  fuch  Thing 
concerning  any  Perfons  whatever  ?  Who  knows 
whether  theNew-Englanders  will  not  hang  ^akersf 
andWitches  again  .^  Butwhyfhould  either  be  fufped- 
cd  ?  The  Clergy  of  England  are  in  general  Friends 

G  g  to 

*  Rom,  lil.  S* 

f  See  the  excellent  and  truly  Honourable  Mr.  Hutchin/m^ 
%\^^9i  X^^MaJfacbufitti.Bajfy  p.  I  $7,  196,  320^ 


226  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  to  religlcus  Freedom  :  The  People  of  England, 
^^'    Whigs   and    Tories,    are  unfavorable   to   clerical 
Power  •,  and  a  faf  greater  Danger,  than  the  Doc- 
tor's imaginary  one,  is,  that  of  their  laying  afidc 
all  Regard   to   the  Chriilian  Miniftry,    in  every 
Shape,  and  to  Chriflianity  itfelf.  S«rdy  then,  there 
never  was  fo  little  Profpect,  that  a  Spirit  of  reli- 
gious Intolerance  would  revive  here*  Or  if  it  fhould^ 
it  might  not  extend  to  New-England ;  for  it  did 
not,    in  the   Reigns  of  James  and  Charles  the 
Firft.     But  even  fuppofing  it  to  reach  thither,  its 
Effects  would  be  very  little  diminifhed  by  the  Cir- 
cumilance  of  no  Bifhops  being  already  placed  in 
America.      They  might  foon  be  fent,    and  with 
much  greater  Authority  than  is  afked  for  them 
how  *,  md  perhaps  with  fome  Resentment  at  the 
OppcfJicn  made  to  them  before.     But  the  whole  Ap- 
prehenfion  is  groundlefs.     The  Englifh  DifTenters, 
who  have  Six  and  Twenty  Bifhops  eftablilhed  a- 
mong  them,  fear  no  Harm  from  them.  Why  then 
iliould  the  New-England  DilTenters  fear  any,  if  one 
or  two  fhould  be  ellablifhed,  with  much  lefs  Power, 
in  one  or  tv/o  neighboring  Provinces  ?  Thofe  Pro- 
vinces  are  not  inhabited  by  Bigots ;  far  from  it. 
Governors,    Aflemblies,    DifTenters,  nay   Church- 
men, and  even  Clergymen,  would  be  all  on  their 
Guard  againfb  epifcopal  Encroachments.     Add  to 
this,  that  fo  public  a  Declaration  as  has  been  made 
of  the  Model  of  Epifcopacy,  propofed  to  be  fol- 
lowed in  America,  will  itfelf  be  an  effedlual  Bar- 
rier againfb  any  undue  Extenfion  of  ecclefiallical 
Power  •,  of  which  the  Do6tor  affects  to  be  fo  ap- 
prehenfive." — 

"  But  he  has  one  Obje6lion  again  ft  Bifliops  in 
our  Colonies,  v/hich  I  had  almoft  overlooked.   He 

knows 


f 


vni. 


DEFENDED.  227 

knows  not  how  they  are  to  be  maintained.    "  Nor,   ^^^^"J^' 
*'  as  he   thinks,  will  they  run  this  Rilqiie,  unlefs 
"  they  have  more  Faitii  in  God,  and  lefs  Love  to 
"  the  World,  than  moft  of  their  Order  have  had, 
*'  fince  Conftantine  the  Great  became  a  nurfing  Fa- 
*•  ther  to  the  Church,  and  the  pious  maternal  Coun- 
*'  cil  of  Nice  fuckled  her  v/ith  the  clear  and  pure, 
*'  the  uncorrupt  and  fincere  Milk  of  Homoopjianity^ 
*'  that  iKe  might  grow  thereby '*     One  might  be  at 
a  Lofs  to  find  out  the  AfTociation   of  Ideas  be- 
tween the  Do6lrine  of  the  Council  of  Nice^  and  the 
Maintenance  of  Bifliops  in  America.    We  can  only 
fuppofe  that  the  Dodlor   has  an  equal  Love  for 
them  both.     But  if  no  proper  Maintenance  can  be 
found  for  them,  he  needs  not  be  uneafy  at  the  Pro- 
je6l  of  fending  them  :  And  that  it  is  not  to  be  at 
the  Expence  of  the  Colonies,  he  has  feen  in  BiPnop 
Butler'^  Scheme,  with  which  the  others  agree." 

"  He  imagines  that  appointing  Bifhops  for  A- 
merica,  would  probably  increafe  the  epifcopal  Par- 
ty there  •,  and  then  great  Evils  might  follow.  I  can- 
not difcern  in  what  other  Way  it  can  increafe  that 
Party,  than  by  fupplying  them  more  eafily  with  a 
competent  Number  of  Miniflers  \  taking  Care  that 
thofe  Miniflers  lliould  be  diligent  and  exemplary  \ 
and  promoting  an  early  Senfe  of  Piety  among 
their  young  People.  Thefe  are  no  Evils  ;  and 
what  can  one  or  two  Bifhops,  on  a  Continent  600 
Miles  long,  do  befides  ?  The  Do6i:or  fays  indeed, 
that  Pretexts  might  eafily  be  found  for  enlarging 
their  Powers,  and  increafmg  their  Number.  But 
enlarging  their  Powers  would  immediately  raife  a 
Clamour  that  could  not  be  withflood.  If  a  few 
Bifhops  proved  difagreeable,  more  would  not  be 
added.     And  though  they  fhould  prove  agreeable 

G  g  a  and 


228  THEAPPEAL 

5ect.   and  ufeful ;  more  would  be  fent,  only  to  fuch  Pro- 
■   -'    vinces  as  chofe  them.     In  the  Ihort  Stay  which  one 
of  them  would  choofe  to  make  in  New-England, 
he   could   not  bring   over  many   Perfons    to  our 
Church.  And  therefore  how  terrible  Things  foever 
Epifcopalians,  if  they  fhould  become  the  Majori- 
ty, may  attempt  and  perform  there,  they  will  b? 
ahrioft,  if  not  quite,  as  likely  to  accomplifli,  without 
.  ever  feeing  a  Billiop  am.ong  them,  as  with  feeing  one 
nov/  and  then.  But  indeed  there  is  very  little  Likeli- 
hood of  their  ever  becoming  the  Majority  there ; 
and  flill  lefs,  of  their  carrying  Points  in  their  own 
Favor,  as  the  Doclor  fancies  they  may,  while  they 
continue  a  Minority  ;  for  all  Parties,  though  di- 
vided among  themfelves,  will  be  fure  to  unite  a- 
gainfl  them.     Nay,  had   they  Power,  there  is  no 
Reafon  to  think  they  would  be  oppreffive  ;  for  they 
are  not  oppreffive  in  the  Colonies  where  they  a6lu- 
ally  have   it :    Or  that  they  v/ould   attempt — for 
they  could  not,  with  any  Modefty,  or  any  Hope 
of  Succefs — fuch  Laws   againft  the  Diffenters,  as 
the  Diffenters  have  not  attempted  againfl  them. 
And   if   the   Zeal  of    the  Nev/~England   Clergy 
threatens  any  Danger,  Bifhops  would  temper  it,  as 
they  have  done  in  England,  inflead  of  inflaming 
it.     Therefore  upon  the  whole,  I  hope  the  Do6lor 
will,  on  cpnfidering  farther,  endeavor  to  reconcile 
our  Countrymen  to  their  AdmifTion  :    A  Requeft, 
in  my  Opinion,  fomewhat  more  reafon  able  than  his, 
that  the  Society  fhould  reconcile  the  Members  of 
our  Church  to  being  contented  without  epifcopaj 

MlNJSTEHsV* 

At 

•  Mr.  Jpthrph  ReviEw  of  Dr.  Mayhenv^s  Remarks  on 
th?  Answer  to  his  OhJer'vatiqn<!  en  the  Charter  and  CendtuS 
ff  the  Society,  &c.  p.   54 — 62. 


DEFENDED.  229 

At  Length  Dr.  Chauncy  re-enters,  telling  us,  p.  Sect. 
178,  that  it  is  evident  by  this  Time,  that  OhjeBions  ^^^ 
can  he  offered  againft  fuch  a  Plan  as  has  been  pro- 
pofed.  To  which  it  is  a  lufficient  Reply,  that  it  is 
alfo  evident  by  this  Time,  that  thofe  Objedions 
can  within  a  much  fmaller  Compafs,  be  anfwered 
'and  confuted. 

I  AM  unable  to  account  for  fo  great  a  Confufion 
of  Ideas,  as  difcovers  itfelf  in  the  two  next  Para- 
graphs.    The  Doflor  feems  very  llrenuoufly   to 
deny,    that  the  Church   of  England  in  America 
has  any  Right  to  the  Epifcopate  propofed :  But 
then   he  declares  himfelf  perfedly  willing  that  we 
fhould  have  it — choofing  perhaps  that  it  ihould  be 
granted  us  as  a  Matter  of  Favor,  rather  than  of 
Right.  But  what  need  is  there  of  this  Diftindtion, 
and  to  what  Purpofe  will  it  ferve,  if  it  is  not  to 
operate  againft  us  }  Our  Claim  is,  that  we  may  be 
upon  an  equal  Footing  with  the  other  religious 
Denominations  in  America.  In  Order  to  this,  it  is 
neceflary  that  we  be  allowed  the  Enjoyment  of  our 
ecclefiaftical  Conftitution,    in   the  fame  compleat 
Manner  as  it  is  enjoyed  by  them.     Of  our  ecclefi- 
aftical Conftitution  Biftiops  make  an  efiential  Part ; 
and  therefore,  without  an  Epifcopate  we  cannot 
enjoy  it.    Our  Claim  is  juftified  by  the  common 
Principles  of  human  Nature,  of  the  Chriftian  Re- 
ligion, and  of  civil  Society.    We  call  it  a  Right, 
becaufe  all  good  Writers  agree  in  calling  a  Claim 
thus  founded  by  that  Name.  But  for  Words  we  do 
not  contend.  What  we  infift  upon  is  this,  and  no 
more  than  this — that  the  Church  of  England  is,  in 
all  Refpe6ts,  fairly  intitled  to  as  full  3.  Toleration 
in  the  Colonies,  as  other  Churches  in  the  Colonies 

enjoy  -, 


THE    APPEAL 

enjoy  ;  and  it  cannot  be  thus  tolerated,  unlefs  it 
be  fuffered  to  exift  in  all  its  Parts.  It  is  therefore 
the  Bufinefs  of  our  Opponents  to  fhew,  that  we 
are  an  Exception  from  the  gen.  ral  Rule,  and  that 
we  ought  not  to  be  treated  in  the  lame  equal  Man- 
ner with  others.  Unlefs  they  are  able  to  fhew  this, 
they  cannot  prove  that  our  Requefl  for  Biiliops  is 
unreafonable. 

But  fays  the  Doctor,  p.  1 80,  the  American  E- 
pifcopalians  vjant  to  be  dijlinguijljed  by  having  Bi- 
Jhops  upo7i  the  Footing  of  a  State-Establishment. 
If  we  want  what  is  unreafonable,  fo  far  it  is  right 
to  oppofe  us ;  but  ftill  our  reafonable  Wants  or 
Defires  ought  to  be  gratified.  But  where  did  he 
learn,  that  we  want  Bifhops  upon  fuch  a  Footing  ? 
Not  from  the  Appeal  \  for  therein  the  direcl  con- 
trary is  exprefsly  and  repeatedly  aiTerted.  Did  he 
learn  it  from  any  Thing  that  has  been  publiilied 
on  the  Side  of  the  Church  ?  Let  hiin  then  inform 
us  from  what^  and  by  whom,  I  know  of  no  fuch 
Thing,  I  can  folemnly  declare.  I  have  it(tn  no- 
thing that  has  been  written,  fmce  the  Plan  was  pro- 
jected in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Anne^  either  in  Eng- 
land or  America,  in  Print  or  in  Manufcript,  that 
indicates  fuch  a  Defire.  I  will  go  ftill  farther  and 
fay,  that  I  have  met  v/ith  nothing  in  the  Courfe  of 
Converfation,  with  Clergymen  or  Laymen,  in  or 
out  of  Convention^  from  whence  I  can  learn  or  fuf- 
"pedl,  that  there  is  an  Epifcopaiian  within  the  Bri- 
tifh  Dominions  that  aims  at,  or  expedls  an  Epifco- 
pate  here,  upon  the  Footing  of  a  State-Efiabliflo^ 
mxnt.  And  yet  without  Flefitation,  or  any  appa- 
rent Remorfe  of  Confcience,  we  are  all  charged 
with  aiming  at  it,  and  are  abufed  for  it  by  many 

[  petulant 


DEFENDED.  231 

*  petulant  Tongues  and  abufive  Pens  -,'  although  Sect. 
not  the  leaft  Evidence  has  yet  been  produced,  by  ^^^ 
the  Managers  againil  us.    Our  Comfort  is,  that 

the  unwarrantable  Condemnation  we  have  received 
from  thefe  Writers  will  avail  but  little  -,  our  Ap- 
peal is  made  to  the  impartial  Public^  from  which 
we  doubt  not  of  a  favorable  Sentence. 

The  Do6lor  affecls  to  doubt,  p.  181,  whether 
the  late  Dr.  Samuel  Chandler  '  gave  his  Confent  to, 

*  and  Approbation  of,  American  Bifliops,  in  the 

*  Manner  they  have  been  requefted.'  But  a  Perfon 
of  high  Rank  and  equal  Integrity,  in  a  Letter 
dated  May  iy64.^  fays,  "  Lord  Willoughby  of 
*'  Parham,  the  only  Bijfenting  Peer^  and  Dr.  Chand- 
"  ler,  have  declared,  after  our  Scheme  (for  Ame- 
"  rican  Bifhops)  was  fully  laid  before  them,  that 
''  they  faw  no  obje6lions  againft  it :"  And  a  Gen« 
tleman  who  is  now  in  America,  was  prefent  at  the 
Converfation  in  which  the  latter  made  that  De- 
claration, and  has  heard  him  exprefs  the  fame 
Sentiments  on  other  Occafions.  Well  then,  if  it 
was  fo,  the  Do6tor  wonders  at  ity  and  accounts  for 
it  by  fuppoftngy  that  he  was  too  complaifant  to  fome 
high  Dignitary  of  the  Church.  But  why  Ihould  he 
wonder  at  it  ?  Whoever  is  acquainted  with  the 
candid  and  generous  Sentiments  of  that  eminent 
DifTenter,  would  much  rather  wonder,  if  he  had 
^ot  approved  of  a  Plan,  fo  beneficial  to  the 
Church,  while  it  is  harmlefs  to  all.  To  fuppofe 
him  over-complaifant  to  any  Dignitary  of  the 
Church,  is  more  than  we  can  fuppofe  would  be 
the  Cafe  of  fome  of  his  Brethren,  on  this  Side 
the  Atlantic.  But  there  is  no  Need  of  the  Sup- 
p ofition,  to  account  for  the  Fad.     Dr.  Chaumy 

himfelf. 


2^2  THE    APPEAL 

S^cT.  himfelf,  who  feems  to  be  as  little  addiaed  to 
•  ^*  the  Sin  of  Complaifance  to  the  Churchy  as  mod 
Men,  has,  in  the  Page  immediately  preceding, 
faid  full  as  much  in  Favor  of  the  propofed  E- 
pifcopate,  as  Dr.  S.  Chandler  is  reprefented  to 
have  faid  :  The  only  Difference  is,  that  he  has 
not  faid  it  with  fo  good  a  Grace. 


SECT. 


DEFENDED. 


33 


ECT. 


SECTION     IX. 

THE  Deiign  of  the  Ninth  Sedion  of  the  Ap-  Sect 
peal  is  to  fhew,  '  that  the  Epifcopate  pro-  JX. 
'  pofed  cannot  hurt  the  DiiTenters,  and  is  free 
'  from  all  reafonable  Objedions.'  In  Anlwer  to 
this  Se6lion,  inflead  of  replying  to  any  Thing  ad- 
vanced in  the  Appeal^  the  Do6lor  begins,  with 
jcombating  his  own  Phantom  of  a  StaH-Eftahlijh- 
mcnt  \  of  v/hich,  no  more  is  needful  to  be  faid. 
He  then  introduces  xhtfi^itious  Addrefs  to  the  U- 
niverfity  of  Cambrid2:e,  in  Order  to  confront  me 
with  a  PafTage,  which  I  do  again  affure  him  was  not 
contained  in  any  Addrefs  of  our  Convention  to  that 
Univerfity,  or  to  any  other  Body  of  Men,  or  to 
any  fmgle  Perfon. 

In  Oppofition  to  what  was  faid  of  the  '  Mild- 
^  nefs,  Tendernefs  and  Moderation  of  the  Engliili 
'  Bifhops,  for  a  long  Courfe  of  Years'  pail,  the 
Dodor  tells  us,  p.  1 8  7,  of  the  Rejedlion  of  the  Pe- 
tition of  the  Prepyterian  Church  at  New -Tor  k  for 
a  Charter  from  the  King  -,  the  Mifcarrjage  of  which 
he  fuppofes  to  have  been  owing  to  the  Interpofiti-  ' 
on  of  the  Lord  Bifhop  of  London.  I  have  no 
Concern  in  that  AiTair,  and  am  not  very  particu- 
larly acquainted  with  it.  But  according  to  the 
New- York  Gentleman's  Account  of  it,  which  the 
Dc6lor  has  inferted,  it  appears,  that  the  Grant  of 
the  Favor  was  confidered  as  a  Breach  of  the  Coro- 
nation Oath^'  •,  and  that  it  was  reported  by  the  B.oard 

Hh  of 

*  One  Branch  of  the  Coronation  Oath  Is  in  the  following 
Words.    The  Archbifhop  or  Bifhop  afks  :  "  Will  You  to  tli? 

*'  utmoil 


234  THE    APPE  AL 

Sect,  q^  "Trade^  that  general  Policy  was  againft  the  Pet i- 
ticners  having  greater  Privileges  than  are  allozDed  by 
•^  the  Laivs  of  Tckr alien.  How  far  the  Grant  would 
have  interfered  v/ith  the  King's  Coronation  Oath, 
it  becomes  not  me  to  lay  •,  thofe  to  whom  it  wjas 
refered  were  the  proper  Judges  •,  and  in  their  Opi- 
nion die  Petition  could  not  ccniiflently  be  grantt-d. 
It  is  the  uncueltionable  Duty  of  his  Majeily's  moft 
honorable  PhV^  Ceuncil^  to  advife  him  againft  what- 
evcris  thought  by  them  to  \m'p\yaBreach  of  the  Coro- 
nation Oath',  it  is  a  Duty  more  pecuharly  incumbent 
upon  any  fuch  Bifhops  as  his  P^^ajeily  thini^s  fit  to 
call  up  to  that  high  TruH.  If  thereibre  the  Bifhop 
of  London,  upon  the  above  Principle,  was  more 
adlive  than  others  in  CDpofino;  the  Meaflire,  it  was 
becaufe  his  Station  required  it/    If  general  Policy^ 

'  in  the  Opinion  gi  the  Lords  of  Trade,  was  aifo    -4 

ao:ainiL  the  Grant,  thev  v/ere  oblip-ed  to  difccunte- 
nance  it  •,  and  the  Petitioners,  I  conceive,  ought 
£0  reft  fatished,  efpecially  as  it  v/as  a  Matter  of 
7neer  Favor,  which  v/as  requefled,  and  m.ore  than 
was  thought  to  be  allowed  by  the  Laws  of  'Tolera- 
tion. I  have  been  moreover  told,  that  befides  the 
Reafons  alfigned,  2,  particular  Policy,  with  P^egard 
to  the  Prefbyterians  in  New- York,  concurred  to 
defeat  the  Petition.  It  was  the  Behef  at  Home, 
that  the  Church  of  Ene;land  had  been  treated  with 
peculiar  Malevolence,  by  fomcj-  of  thofe  very  Per- 

fons 


*'  utmofl  of  your  Power  maintain  the  Laws  of  God,  the  true 
*'  ProfelTiGn  of  theGofpeh  and  the  Proteftant  reformed  Re» 
"  liglcn  eftablifiied  by'  the  Law  r  And  will  You  preferve 
'^'  unco  the  Bifhops  and  Clergy  of  this  Realm,  and  to  the 
*'  Churches  committed  to  tlieir  Charge,  al!  fuch  Plights  and 
**  Privileges  as  by  Law  do  cr  fhall  appertain  unto  them,  or 
"  any  of  them  ?''  To  which  the  King  or  Queen  anfwer^, 
^'  All  this  I  promife  to  do.'' 

Bhickitone's  C'.inm:ntarl2s^  Vol.  L  p.  235. 


I 


DEFENDED.  235 

fons  v/hofe  Names  v/ere  annexed  to  the  Petition.   Sect. 
It  was   therefore  not  unnatural   to    fuipecl,    that     ^^* 
any  additional  Power  put  into  the  Hands  of  fuch 
Perfons,  would,  as   Opportunity  fliouid  offer,  be 
exerted  againft  the  Church. 

In  Proof   of   the  prefent   mild   Spirit  of  the 
Church  of  England  and  of  the  Prelates  who  pre- 
fide  over  it,  Reierence  was  made  in  the  Jppeal^  to 
the  general  Senfe  of  it  ccnfelTed  by  the  DilTenters 
at.Horne.    '  The  late  Dr.  G.  Benfon,  a  very  learn- 
'  ed  DilTenter,'  y^as  given  as  an  Inftance  to  this  Pur-, 
pofe  ;  v/ho  '  did  not  fcruple  to  make  the  following 
'  Declaration :'  "  The  Church  of  England,  with 
"  its  prefent  Candor,    Spirit  of   Toleration   and 
"  Charity,  appears  to  me,  to  be  the  beft  Eftabliih- 
"  ment  on  the  Face  of   the  Earth."      Here  the 
Trejhyter  in  Old  England  furioufly  falls  upon  me, 
charging  me  y/ith  having  been  guilty  of  a  Mifquota- 
tion,  and  an  artful  Deception^  thereby  impof^ng  upon 
the  Americans.  Take  it  in  his  own  Words  :  Our  Mif- 
fionary  (Pray,  Mr.  Prefoyter^  ^hy  your  Miffionary  ?) 
cught  to  have  giveit  the  'Teftimony  its  full  Scope  •,  for 
thefe  are  the  IVords  of  Br.  Benfon  following  in  im- 
mediate Conne5lion — "  to  which  I  would  conform 
"  mod  gladly  and  with  all  my  Soul,  provided  they 
*'  would  admit  me,  without  requiring  any  Thing, 
"  which  appears  to  me  unreafonable,  or  unfcrip- 
"  tural.     But,  as  long  as  fuch  Things   are  con- 
"  tained  in  her  Articles,    and  mixed  v.'ith  every 
*'  Part   of   the   common    Forms    of    Worfnip,'* 
(meaning,   I  fufpe6t,  the  Dodlrine  of  the  Trinity) 
*'  my  Confcience  obliges  me  to  diffent,  and  avoid 
"  Conrmunion  with  her.     I  fmcerely  wifli  her   a     - 
*'  thorough    Reformation,     and    that    fpeedily.'* 
What  ?nuft  now  he  thought  of  this  Miffionary  from  the 

.   H  h  2  Society., 


236  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.   Society^  thus  impojing  on  the  Americans y  not  capahU^ 

IX.    j-^y  ^^^  general^  of  coming  at  Dr.  Benfon's  Book,  nor 

of  detecting  the  mifreprefented  'Tefiimony  ♦,  which  when 

fairly  given,  is  as  full  agaifift  his  Church  Syftem,  as 

the  Power  of  hanguage  can  exprefs.  This  is  the  Ob- 

je6lion,  in  its  full  Scope,    before  I  faw  this  Prejhy- 

ler'^s  Performance,  a  Friend  who  had  read  it,  upon 

,my  Inquiry,  told  me,  that  he  met  in  it  with  but 

one  PafTage  that  could  deferve  Notice  ;  which  is 

the  PafTage  I  have  quoted.  When  I  came  to  fee  it, 

it  appeard  to  me  to  be  in  itfelf  not  worthy  of  a 

Reply,  as  I  ftill  think  j  however  as  fome  officious 

Zealot  has  caufed  it  to  be  re-printed  in  one  of  the 

Boflon  Papers,  tor  this  Reafon  it  may  be  proper 

briefly  to  anfwer  it. 

Whenever  an  Author  is  quoted,  to  fhew  his  Opi- 
nion upon  any  particularPoint,  common  Senfe  teaches 
us  that  it  is  unfair  to  quote  him  imperfedlly  •,  or  in 
fuch  a  Manner  that  his  Opinion  on  that  Point  is  mif- 
reprefented. At  the  fame  Time,  no  Perfon  of  com- 
mon Senfe  will  quote  farther  than  relates  to  the 
Point  under  Confideration.     Let  us  then  examine, 
for  what  Purpofe  Dr.  Benfon  was  quoted  in  the  Jp- 
peal-,  from  whence  only  we  muft  judge  whether  he 
was  quoted  fairly  or  not.  Now  if  any  one  will  be  at 
the  Trouble  of  turning  to  the  Appeal,  p.  90,  he  will 
fee,  that  his  Teilimony  was  manifeftly  produced,  as 
an  Evidence   of  the  *  Mildnefs,  Tendernefs  and 
*  Moderation'    of   '    the   Englifli   Bifhops'  for  a 
'  Courfe  of  Years'  paft;  and  for  no  other  Pur- 
pofe.    But  had  Dr.  Benfon  ever  declared  his  Opi- 
nion upon   this  Point  ?  Yes,  diredly  and  fully,  in 
in  the  Words  quoted.  Did  the  Qiiotation  include 
the  whole  of  his   Declaration,    and  fairly  exprefs 
the  whole  of  his  Opinion  ?  I  affirm  that  it  include 
ed  every  Word  relating  to  the  Subjed,  and  confe- 

qu€ntly 


DEFENDED.  23 

qently  conveyed  the  whole  of  his  Opinion  there-  Sect 
upon,  [o  far  as  he  thought  proper  to  exprefs  it.     ^^' 
What  then  is   the  Prejhyter's  Objedlion  ?  That  I 
gave  not   the  Teftimony  its  full  Scope.     In  what 
Manner  does   he  attempt  to  fupport  it  ?  He  al- 
ledges  my  OmifTion  of  Words  that  follow  in  imme- 
diate  Connexion  with  thofe  quoted.     What  is  the 
Tendency  of  the  Words  omited  ?  To  account  for 
Dr.  Benfon's  not  conforming  to  the  Church.    Was 
the  Reafon  then  of  his  not  conforming,  that  the 
Church  appeared  to  him  to  be  defective  in  Mild- 
nefs  and  Moderation  ?  No,  a  quite  different  Thing, 
it  was  becaufe  "  fuch  Thino-s  are  contained  in  her 
*'  Articles,"  &c.  as  appeared  to  him  to  be  "  un- 
"  reafonable  or  unfcriptural."    The  Objedlor  was 
able  to  fee   this,  for  he  obferves  that  the  Words 
omited  contain  a  Teftimony — againft  what  '^.   Why, 
not  againft  the  Moderation   of  the  Biftiops    and 
Clergy,  the  only  Thing  then  in  Queftion  ;  but— - 
againft  the  Cburch-Syjiem.    I  am  forry  that  he  was 
not  able  alfo  to  fee,  that  I  was  not  upon  the  Sub- 
je6l  of  Church- Syft ems.,  but  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land's Mildnefs  to  DilTenters  : — And  that  I  mio-ht, 
with   as  much  Propriety,  have  quoted  any  other 
PafTage  in  the  whole  Book,  as  that  which  I  am 
blamed   for  omiting,  although  it  was  in  immediate 
Conneoiiort  with  the  Sentence  tranfcribed.    It  is  now 
fubmitted  to  the  Reader,  whether  my  Quotation 
was  unfair,  or  the  Preft)yter's  Animadverfion  unjuft 
and  impertinent. 

From  the  Englifti  DiiTenters,  I  pafled  on  to  fliew 
the  favorable  Opinion  of  the  Church  of  England, 
which  was  entertained  by  fome  of  the  moft  emi- 
nent Reformers  and  foreign  Proteftants  •,  and  by 
Calvin  amongft  others.     In  Anfwer  to  this.  Dr. 

Chauncy 


THE    APPEAL 

Chauncy  denies  that  Calvin  had  any  Friendfliip  % 
Epifcopacy.  ^  The  plain  Truth  is,  fays  he,  Calvin 
'was  in  Principle  as  real  an  Enemy  to  the  divine  Right 
4  Epifcopacy\  as  to  the  divine  Right  of  Popes^  ^, 
1 88.  But  Enemy  as  he  was,  to  fay  nothing  now  of 
his  Teftimony  in  Favor  of  Epifcopacy  which  was 
produced  in  the  Appeal,  he  acknowledges  that  it  was 
the  Government  of  ail  the  Churches  upon  Earth, 
from  the  Times  of  the  Apoftles,  for  1500  Years 
togetherf.  "  But  his  extraordinary  Opinicn  of  E- 
*'  pifcopacy  y/ill  farther  appear  in  a  Letter,  which 
"  he  and  Bullinger,  and  other  learned  Men  beyond 
"  Sea,  wrote  Anno  1549  to  King  Edward  the  Sixth, 
"  offering  to  make  him  their  Defender,  and  to 
*'•  have  Bifnops  in  their  Churches  for  better  Unity 
"  and  Concord  amongft  them,  as  may  be  feen  in 
"  Mr.  Strype's  Memorial  of  Archbifhop  Cranmer  ; 
"  as  likewife,  by  a  Writing  of  Archbifhop  Abbot's, 
"  found  amongft:  the  Manufcriots  of  Archbifhop 
"  UfherJ."  Archbiihop  Abbot's  Manofcript,  to 
which  the  learned  Anfwerer  of  Peirce  refers,  in  the 
above  Paffage,  has  the  following  Words  :  "  Pe- 
"  rufing  fome  Papers  of  our  PredeceiTor  Matthew 
"  Parker,  we  find  that  John  Calvin,  and  others  of 
''  the  protellant  Churches  of  Germany  and  elfe- 
''  where,  would  have  had  Epifcopacy,  if  permit- 
''  ted.— And  whereas  John  Calvin  had  fent  a  Let^ 
"  ter  in  King  Edward  the  Sixth's  Reign,  to  have 
"  conferred  with  the  Clergy  of  England  about 
"  fome  Things  to  this  Effed,  two  (popiHi)  Bifhops, 
"  viz.  Gardiner  and  Bonner,  intercepted  the  fame  ; 
"  whereby  Mr.  Calvin's  OiTerture  perifhed.  And 
"  he  received  an  Anfwer,  as  if  it  had  been  from 
"  the  reformed  Divines  of  thofe  Times ;   wherein 

^'  they 

t  Inllit.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  IV.  Sed.  2. 
X  Anfwer  to  Peirce,  p,  17. 


DEFENDED.  239 

«■'  they  checked  him,  and  flighted  his  Propofals,   Sect. 
*••  From  which  Time  John  Calvin  and  the  Church     IX. 
''  of  England  were  at  Variance  in  leveral  Points  •, 
"  which  orhewife  through  God's  Mercy  had  been 
'•^  qualified,  if  thofe  Papers  of  his  Propofals  had 
'^  been  difcovered  unto  the  Qiieen*s  Majeily  during 
''  John  Calvin's  Life.    But  being  not  difcovere^ 
*'  until,  or  about  the  fixth  Year  of  her  Majefly's 
"  Reign,    her  Majefly  much  lamented  they  were 
^'  not  found  fooner :  Which  Ihe  exprelTed  before 
"  her  Council  at  the  fam.e  Time,  in  the  Prefence 
''  of  her  great  Friends  Sir  Henry  Sidney,  and  Sir 
''  WiUiam  Cecil*."    ' 

Almost    all   the    foreign  Proteftants,    of   any 
Diftinction,  have  been  Friends  to  Epifcopacy ;   al-- 
though  many  of  them  have  been  unable  to  obtain 
that  primitive    Form    of    Government   for   their 
Churches.    '  Luther  profeiles  that  if  the  popilh 
*  Bilhops  would   ceale  to   perfecute  the    Golpel, 
"  v/e  would  acknov/Iedge  them  as  our  Fathers,  and      - 
"  v/iilingly   obey  their  Authority,  ^ivbicb  we  find 
"  fwppcrtcd  by  the  Word  of  God.''    "  Melancthon    ^ 
''  lays  ihe  Blamx  on  the  Cruelty  of  the  popiih  Bi- 
"  fnops,  that  that  canonical  Polity  was  deilroyed, 
"  which,  fiiith  he,  zve  fi  earneftly  defired  to  preferve  : 
"  And  bids  the  Paphls   confider  what  Account 
^'  they   will  render    to   God  for    thus    fcattering 
"  his 'church."    "-  And  Heerhrand,  Chancellor  of 
"^  Tubingen,  fays,  "  it  had  been  a  falutary  Thing 
*'  if  every  Province  could  have  had  its  Bifliops, 
«'  and  they  their  Metropolitans."—"  In  the  French 
'  Church  S'p^.nheim  witneffes,  "  nee  obfcuri  lunt 
"•'  in  Gaiiia'ipfa  reformata  illi  Theologi,  quorum  fi 
"  Votis  fuiifet  Locus,  nee  intercefTiflent  Obices  re- 

y-  moyeri 

f  Strype-s  Life  of  Parker,  p.  70, 


THE    APPEAL 

''  moveri  ncfcii,  accepiffcnt  pierique  Fcrmam  epifco- 
''  palis  Difdplin^.--CitzrequQ  hanc  in  Rem,  Ca- 
*'  faubonos^  Camerones^  Diodatos,  Bochartos,  Lan- 
''  gleos^  ac  vivos  etiam  Teftes,  proclive  fore."— 
'  Even  the  Synod  of  Bort,  by  their  Prefident  Bc- 
'  german^  expreffed  their  Approbation  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  of  Epifcopacy,  v/hich 

*  they  were  defirous  to  eflablifli  in  their  Churches, 
■'  but  the  Times  would  not  then  permit  them  to 
'  make  this  Change  ;  complaining  of  their  Want 
'  of  it^  as  a  Misfortune  :  "  Nobis  non  licet  ejfe  tarn 

heatisT  And  Le  Clerc  fays,  he  profeffes  his 
^  Belief  to  be,  that  Epifcopacy  is  of  apoflolical  In- 

ilitunon,  and  that  none  have  a  Right  to  depart 
'  from  it,  unlefs  in  Cafes  where  the  Corruptions  of 

the  Church  cannot  be  remedied  without  it :  And 

*  that  thofe,  who  live  in  proteftant  Countries  where 
they  have  Bilhops,  as  in  England,  are  greatly  to 
blame  "  to  feparate  themfelves  from  them  •,  and 

more  fo,  if  they  endeavor  to  overthrow  Epifco- 
"  pacy  in  Order  to  introduce  Prefbytery,  Fanatic 
^'  cifm  or  Anarchy"^." 


GROriUS,^  not  only  the  Glory  of  Holland,  but 
the  Honor  of  the  human  Species,  afierts,  that 
;^'  Epifcopacy  had  its  Beginning  in  the  apoftolical 
"  Tim.es.  ihis,  fays  he,  is  teftified  by  the  Cata- 
"  logues  of  Billiops  left  us  by  Iren^us,  Eufebius, 
"  Socrates^  neodcret  and  others,  who  all  begin 
"  from  the  apoilohcal  Age.  But  to  detracl:  from 
"  the  Faith  of  fuck  V/riters,  and  fo  agreeable  to 
"  one  another  in  their  Affertions  in  an  hillorical 
^'  Matter,  is  the  Part  only  of  an  irreverend  and  ob- 

flinate  Mind.     It  is   as  much  as  if  you  fhould 
"  deny  that  to  be  true,  which  all  the  Roman  Hif- 

"  tories. 
Second  Letter  to  the  Author  of  the  Confessional. 


D  £  F  E  N  D  E  D.  ^4t 

"  tories  deliver,  that  the  ccnfular  Authority  began   Sect* 
"  upon  the  driving  out  of  the  Tarqidns^,^'    But     ^^* 
no  Teflimony  of  this  Kind  is  more  extraordinary, 
than  that  of  David  Blonde l^  vv'ho  had  concluded 
his  Apologia  pro  Hieronymi  Sententia^  with  Words  to 
this  Purpofe:  "  By  all  that  we  have  faid  to  afTert  the 
"  Rights  of  the  Prefbytery,  we  do  not  intend  to  in- 
"  validate  the  ancient  and  apofiolical  Conftitution  of 
epi [copal  Pre-eminence.       But   v/e   believe   that 
wherefoever  it  is  eilablifhed  conformably  to  the 
ancient  Canons,  it  mufl  be  carefully  preferved  ; 
and  wherefoever  by  fome  Heat  of  Contention 
or  otherwife,  it  hath  been  put  down  or  violated, 
it  ought  to  be  reverently  reftored."    '  But  that 
Book  having  beefi  v/ritten  at  the  earneft  Requeft  of 
the  Ajjhnhly  of  Divines  at  Weilrr.iniler,  and  of  the 
2cois  efpecially,  who  had  their  Agents  at  Paris  to 
ftrengthen  their  Party,  by  mifinforming  the  Pro- 
teftants  of  France,  and  winning  them  to  their  Side  : 
When  thefe  Agents  faw  this  Conclufion  of  Mr. 
Blondei's  Manulcript,  they  expoflulated  with  him 
very  loud,  for  marring  all  the  good  he  had  done  in 
his  Book,    and  never  left  importuning  him,  till 
they  had  prevailed  upon  him  to  ftrike  out  that  Con-*^ 
clufion.'    This  Piece  of  Intelligence  v/as  given  to 
Dr.  du  Moulin  by  Archbilliop  Uiher,  Anno  1651*. 

If  we  come  down  lower,  to  the  Beginning  of 
c!\e  prelent  Century,  we  find  the  Church  of 
Geneva^  in  their  Correfponderice  with  the  U- 
niverfity  of  Oxford,  and  the  Bifhop  of  Lon- 
don, exprefling  Sentiments  of  the  greateft  Ref- 
ped  for  the  Conftitution  and  Government  of 
the  Church  of  England ;  "  We  are  fo  far,"     fay 

I  i  the 

t  De  Imperio  fummarum  PoteHatum  :  apud  Brett, 

'    See  Biographla  Britannicay  hxX,  DuRELL,  in  Note  H. 


242  THE    APPEAL 

^f^T-  the  ecclefiaftical  and  academical  AfTembly  of 
•*'"•  Geneva  Anno  1706,  "  from  having  any  Antipathy 
*'  againft  the  Church  of  England,  that  at  all  Times 
*'  we  have  held  her  in  very  high  Efteem,  and  not 
"  one  of  our  AfTembly,  during  his  Stay  in  England, 
"  ever  abfented  himfelf  from  their  Congregations, 
"  and  Ceremonies*".  About  the  fame  Time,  Dr. 
Nichols  carried  on  a  Correfpondence  with  Daniel 
Erneft  Jahlonjki^  a  celebrated  proteftant  Divine, 
v/ho  was  Minifter,  ecclefiaftical  Counfellor,  and 
Prefident  of  the  Society  of  Sciences,  in  Berlin. 
In  a  Letter  to  Dr.  Nichols,  dated  1708,  Prefident 
Jablonjkihys^  i  "  I  fpent  my  Youth  in  Pruflia  and 
''  Poland,  among  Britifh  Subje(n:s,  who  were  averfe 
"  from  the  Church  of  England,  and  had  been  Par- 
*'  ties  in  the  Difputes  betwixt  the  Epifcopalians  and 
"  Prefbyterians.  Converfe  with  them  had  filled  my 
"  tender  Mind  with  fuch  Prejudices  againft  your 
"  Church,  that  when  I  came  a  young  Man  into 
"'  England,  in  1680,  I  had  an  utter  Abhorence  of 
''  it,  and  thought  her  public  Places  of  Worfhip 
*•  were  as  much  to  be  avoided  as  thofe  of  the  Pa- 
"  pifts.  Soon  after,  in  endeavouring  to  learn  the 
"  Language,  I  happened  on  the  XXXIX  Articles; 
"  tlie  pure  Orthodoxy  of  which  I  fo  approved  of, 
"  that,  doubting  of  my  former  Opinion,  I  more 
"  clofely  examined  the  whole  Controverfy;  your 
"  ecclefiaftical  ConftitUtion,  your  Liturgy,  the 
''  Objedlions  made  to  each,  and  the  whole  Foun- 
"  dation  of  the  Schifm.  The  longer  I  communi- 
"  cated  with  that  Church,  the  more  I  grew  con- 

"  firmed 

*  Many  Particulars  of  the  above-mentioned  Correfpon- 
dence have  been  lately  publiibed  in  New-York,  in  a  laro-e 
Pamphlet,  intitled,  Truth  Triumphant,  &c.  in  which 
there  is  a  valuable  Collection  of  Tcflimonies  of  the  like 
Nature. 


C  i 


DEFENDED.  2 

^  firmed  in  the  Opinion  that  her  Articles  had  no  S 
''  Heterodoxy,  her  Liturgy  no  Idolatry  or  Super-  ^^^ 
*^  ftition,  her  Government  much  good  Order  and 
*'  Decency;  and  that  on  this  Account,  among  all 
*'  the  reformed  Churches,  She  came  neareft  to  the 
Patent  of  the  primitive  Churchy  and  was  dc- 
fervedly  ejleemed  the  hrighteft  Star  in  the  Chrijiian 
Heaven^  the  chief  Glory  of  the  Reformation^  and 
the  fecurefi  Defence  of  the  Gofpel  againfi  Popery  ^ 
**  and  that  no  one  can  refufe  her  Communion  without 
"  Schism.  Yet  I  fo  follow  and  honor  the  Church' 
•'  of  England,  as  not  to  hate,  but  pity,  your 
*'  Prefbyterians  ;  the  greater  Part  of  whom,  I  be- 
**  lieve,  trained  up  in  hereditary  Prejudices,  acl 
"  with  a  good  Confcience  •,  but  that  fome  among§i 
f*  them  ahufe  the  Simplicity  of  the  Rejl*,'' 

*  ^ccen^t  Litter  to  the  Author  of  the  Confessional,  p.  202* 


*Dp  ^Cb  ?fip 

3eC 


lia 


S  I 


;44  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 


SECTION     X. 


X. 


Se^ct.    y^NE  Secfion  of  the  Appeal  was  devoted  to  the 
V^  Confideration  of  the  grand  popular  Objecti- 
on againft  an  American  Epilcopate,  that  it  would 
fubjed;  the  People  of  this  Country  to  the  Payment 
of  Tithes.     To  this   Sedion,  which  was  one  of 
the  moft  important   in  the  Appeal^  Dr.  Chauncy  at- 
tempts no  Aniwer  at  all ;  evading  it  by  laying,  p. 
191,  that  it  has  no  immediate  Conneetion  ivith  the 
frefent  Siwject.    But  he  knows  that  before  the  Pub- 
lication of  the  Appeal^  it  was  commonly  thought  to 
be  moll  clofely  and  intimately  connected  with  the 
Subject,  and  that  it  was  one  of  the  moft  general 
Objedlions     againft    American    Eiihops    that    was 
rnentioned.     AVhen  People  were  afked  their  Opi- 
nion of  fuch  an  Appointment,  there  was  not  per- 
haps one  in  Fifty,  of  thole  who  knew  not  what 
Kind  of  an  Epifcopate  was  propofed,  but  would 
anfwer,  that  we  ftiould  all  in  that  Cafe  be  fubjed 
to  the  Payment  of  Tithes,    This  was  frequently 
offered  as  the  only  Objcdlion,  and  almoft  always  as 
the  firft  •,  and  there  were  but  very  few  of  the  com- 
mon People  that  had  any  other  Objedions  to  offer, 
than  this  of  J'itbes^   and  that  of  Spiritual  Courts, 
It  was  therefore  one  principal  Defign  of  the  Ap- 
peal^ to  remove  thefe  two  Objedlions  -,  in  the  Exe- 
ccution  of  which  I  have  been  lb  fuccelsful,  that 
even  the  Doctor  can  find  nothing  to  fay  in  Sup- 
port of  either  of  themi.     We  are  told  now,  that 

the 


DEFENDED.  245 

tlie  Affair  of  Tithes  has  no  immediate  Ccnnecticn  Sect. 
with  the  general  Subjedt  in  Debate.  This  is  unfair  ^* 
and  ungenerous.  If  the  Doctor  had  fet  out,  and 
proceeded,  with  as  much  Candor  as  is  due,  I  will 
not  fay,  from  one  Chriftian  and  Clergyman  to  ano- 
ther, but,  from  Man  to  Man,  he  would  have  con- 
feijcd,  that  thelc.  two  popular  Objections  had  been 
fo  intirely  confuted  in  the  Appeal^  that  they  ought 
not  any  more  to  be  mentioned  in  this  Controverfy. 
It  would  have  been  no  Injury  to  his  Character, 
or  his  Caufe,  to  have  made  this  candid  Acknow- 
ledgment i  for  in  the  Cafe  of  every  literary  En» 
gagement,  a  decent  Retreat  is  the  next  befl  Thing 
1:0  a  Victory, 

To  ftrengthen  what  was  faid  upon  the  Subject, 
and  to  confirm  the  Dodtor  in  his  prefent  Opinion, 
I  will  prefent  him  with  the  full  and  explicit  Decla- 
ration, of  one  of  the  moil  judicious  and  cele- 
brated Writers,  that  ever  treated  of  the  Laws  of 
England.  In  fpeaking  of  the  Britifh  Colonies  in 
America,  he  fays  :  '*  It  hath  been  held,  that  if 
"  an  uninhabited  Country  be  difcovered  and  plant- 
^'  ed  by  Engiifh  Subje^^s,  all  the  EnglLQi  Laws 
"  then  in  being,  which  are  the  Birthright  of  every 
"  Subjedl,  are  immediately  then  in  Force.  But 
*'  this  muft  be  underftood  with  ver}^  many  and 
very  great  Reftriclions.  Such  Colonifts  carry 
with  them  only  fo  much  of  the  Engiifh  Lav/, 
as  is  applicable  to  their  ow^n  Situation  and  the 
''  Condition  of  an  infant  Colony  ;  fuch,  for  In- 
*'  ilance,  as  the  general  Rules  of  Inheritance,  and 
"  of  Protection  from  perfonal  Injuries.  The  ar- 
^'  tificial  Refinements  and  Diftinciions  incident  to 
"  the  Property  of  a  great  and  commercial  Pco- 
iJ  pie,  (fuch  efpccially  as  are  inforced  by  Penal- 

^  ties) 


246  THE    APPEAL 

Sect.  "  ties)  the  Mode  of  Maintenance  for  the  eJtaUifhei 

^'     "  Clergy^  the  Jurifdiction  of  fpirttual  Courts^  and 

*'  a  Multitude  of  other  Provifions,    are  neither 

*'  necefTary  nor  convenient  for  them,  and  there- 

^'  fore  ARE    NOT   IN   FoRCEf ." 

As  none  of  my  Opponents  have  hitherto  thought 
proper  to  revive  the  baffled  Objeftions  of  Tithes 
and  Spiritual  Courts,  I  fhall  immediately  proceed 
to  the  concluding  Section. 

t  Blackllon^'s  Cotnmentariei  on  tk  lavjs  of  England^^  VoJ, 
L  p.  107. 


5  E  C  T. 


DEFENDED.  247 

SECTION     XI. 


THE  Defign  of  the  laft  Section  of  the  Ap-  Sect. 
peal  was  to  remove  the  few  remaihing  Ob-     ^* 
jedlions  and  Sufpicions  :    Of  whicji  the  firft  was, 
that,  in  Cafe  of  an  Epifcopate,  Laws  may  hereaf- 
ter be  made  to  fubjedl  us  to  the  Payment  of  Tithes. 
To  this  it  was  anfwered,  that  '  there  can  be  no 

*  more  Reafon  to  be  apprehenfive,  that  new  Laws 

*  will  be  made  under  an  Epifcopate,  to  fubjedl  us  to 

*  this  Burthen,  than  if  Bilhops  were  not  to  be  fent- 

*  hither.     For  Tithes  are  not  paid  in  England  to 

*  Bilhops,  but  the  Incumbents  of  Parilhes.'    Dr. 
Chauncy  would  be  thought  to  be   of  a  different 
Opinion,  and  to  be  apprehenfive  of  this  Evil ;  e- 
fpe dally  if  the  Support  of  m oft  of  the  epifc opal  Clergy, 
in  many  of  the  Colonies^  fhould  continue  to  depend  on 
the  Charity  of  Belief  actors  at  Home^  as  would  proha- 
IJy  he  the  Cafe^  p.  192.    Thus  it  feems,  the  Impo- 
fition  of  Tithes  for  the  Support,  not  of  Bilhops, 
but  of  the  Clergy,  is  the  Evil  to  be  dreaded.    But 
the  Clergy  will  have  the  fame  Need  of  Support, 
with,    as  without,    an  Epifcopate  ♦,    and  if  their 
Support  is  the  Objecl,  the  Appointment  or  Non- 
Appointment  of  Bilhops,  which  has  no  Connexi- 
on v^ith  it,  w^ill  not  have  any  great  Influence  upon 
the  Purfuit  of  it*     To  fuppofe  that  two  or  three 
Bilhops  in  America  w^ill  be  able  to  turn  the  Scale 
fo  much  in  Favor  of  the  Clergy,  implies,  either 
that  the  Ballance  is  nearly  equal  without  them  -,  or 
that  thefe  Bilhops  will  Iiave  much  more  Weight, 

than 


XI. 


;i4S  THEAPPEAL 

Sect,  than  Perfons,  fo  deflltute  of  civil  Power,  were 
ever  known  to  have.  Were  every  Member  of  the 
Legiflature,  both  at  Home  and  in  the  Colonies, 
firiTjIy  and  zealoufly  attached  to  the  Church  ;  nay, 
if  there  were  not  a  Diflenter,  Papift"  or  Infidely 
within  the  Britiili  Dominions,  the  Impofition  of 
Tithes  upon  Americans  tor  the  Support  of  their 
Clergy,  would  be  an  Imagination  perfedllywild  and 
chimerical.  A  large  Majority  of  the  King's  Sub- 
jeds  in  England  and  the  Colonies,  are  at  this  very 
Time  Epifcopalians  -,  but  there  is  no"  Reafon  to  be- 
lieve that  in  fo  large  a  Number  there  is  a  fingle 
Perfon  that  wifnes  it ;  and  if  they  were  all  Church- 
men without  Exception,  it  is  more  that  probable 
that  there  would  not  be  one  Advocate  for  fuch  a 
Meafure. 

But,  fays  the  Docftor,  tvithcut  all  Bouht,  this 
Law,,  or  feme  ether  lefs  offenfive  in  Sounds  vjouki 
take  Place  here,  as  foon  as  the  State  of  things  would 
allow  of  it.  I  find  it  much  harder  to  afcertain  the 
Meaning  of  many  of  his  Objections,  than  to  anf- 
wer  them,  when  the  Senfc  is  afeertained.  If  he 
means  in  thefe  "Words,  that  fome  other  Law,  lefs 
offenfive  only  in  Sound,  but  equal  in  its  EfFed:, 
with  the  Impofition  of  Tithes,  will  without  all 
Doubt  be  made  for  the  Support  of  the  Clergy ;  it 
is  anfwered  above.  And,  what  are  we  to  under- 
fland  by  the  Expreffion,  as  foon  as  the  State  of 
things  will  allow  of  it?  The  State  of  Things 
which  in  his  Opinion  would  amount  to  this,  re 
quires  an  Explanation  previoufly  to  an  Anlwer. 
The  Dodor  feems  here  to  have  fhifted  the  Idea  of 
'Tithes^  or  of  fome  Equivalent^  for  the  Support  of 
the  Clergy y  for  that  of  a  'Tax  to  fupport  the  BifJoops. 
For  he  immediately  obferves,  that  I  had  incauti- 

oufly 


DEFENDED.  249 

mfy  drcpt  that^  which  naturally  leads  to  Juch  a  Sect. 
^houghty  viz.  A  Tax  for  the  Support  of  American 
Bifhops.  And  then  I  am  introduced  as  anfwering 
the  next  Obje5ficn^  which  is  no  other  than  this  very 
Sufpicion  or  Apprehenfion.  Thus  the  Reader  fees, 
that  by  an  unexpedled  Tranfition,  whether  artful  or 
artlefs,  I  will  not  determine,  we  are  carried  to  ano- 
ther Point. 

In  fpeaking  to  the  Subjed  of  an  imaginary  Tax 
for  the  Support  of  American  Bifhops^  nothing  which 
I  meant  or  wifhed  to  conceal,  was  incautioujly  dropt. 
For  in  anfwering  the  Objection,  I  denied  that  fuch 
a  Tax  v/as  at  all  intended  or  defired.  I  moreover 
fhewed  that  it  could  not  be  much  wanted — that  it 
was  always  propofed,  that  the  Bifhops  fhould  be 
fupported  without  any  Expence  to  this  Country — 
that  a  confiderable  Fund  was  already  raifed  for  that 
Purpofe — and,  fo  far  as  it  fhould  be  deficient,  that 
there  was  no  Doubt  entertained  by  the  Friends  of 
the  propofed  Appointment,  of  its  being  eafily  made 
up  by  voluntary  Donations.  But  farther  to  fhew 
that  Americans  have  no  Reafon  to  be  terrified  on 
that  Account,  I  confidered  the  Matter  under  the 
mofl  unfavourable  Suppofition  that  could  be  made ; 
namely,  that  the  Deficiency  of  the  epifcopal  Fund 
fhould  be  anfwered  by  a  Tax  upon  the  Inhabitants  ; 
and  declared  it  as  my  Opinion,  that  fuch  a  Tax 
would  be  inconfiderable,  and  amount  to  no  more 
than  Four  Pence  in  a  Hundred  Pounds.     '  This, 

*  as  I  went  on  to  obferve,  would  be  no  mighty 

*  Hardfhip  upon  the  Country.      He  that   could 

*  think  much  of  giving  the  fix  thoufandth  Part  of 

*  his  Income  to  any  Ufe,  which  the  Legiflature  of 

*  his  Country  fhould  aiTign,    deferves  not  to  be 

*  confidered  in  the  Light  of  a  good  Subjed,  or 

K  k  '  Member? 


250  THE     APPEAL 

Sect.   «  Member  of   Society.'    This  Obfervaticn  I   flill 
■^^*     believe  to  be  as  true,  as  any  Propofition  in  the  Ap^ 
-peal^  or  in  the  Do<5lor*s  Anfwer  to  it*.    But  there- 
upon he  apoflrophifes  and  harangues  ad  Populum^ 
in  the  following  rhetorical  Strain  :  Tgu  fee  here^  ye 
Colonifts^  the  Opinion  of  the  Dr.  and^  we  reafonably  ■ 
prefume^  of  the  epifcopal  Clergy  under  whofe  Direc- 
tion he  wrote,  that  the  Country  fnight  in  Equity, 
he  taxed  for  the  Support  of  Bifhops,  p.  193.     But 
I  affirm  that  the  Colonifts  fee  no  fuch  Thing.  Such 
an  Opinion  I  never  expreffed,  either  cautioufly  or 
incautioufly  ♦,  and  never  once  intimated  that  I  thought 
fuch  a  Tax  would  be  equitable.  If  he  will  but  re- 
view the  PafTage,  he  mufl  be  convinced  of  this 
himfeif,    unlefs   he  is   in  the   Condition  of  thofe, 
who  "  having  Eyes,  fee  not  -,"  and  if  he  will  re- 
view his  own  Condudl  relating  to  it,  perhaps  he 
may  be  convinced  of— Something  elle. 

The  Argument  he  ufes  to  prove,  that  a  good 
Subjeft  and  Member  of  Society  might  confidently 
refufe  to  pay  the  fix  thoufandth  Part  of  his  Income, 
towards  the  Support  of  American  Bifhops,  in  Cafe 
fuch  a  Tax  fhould  be  conftitutionally  impofed  ;  by 
proving  too  much,  unfortunately  proves  nothing. 
If  the  Country  might _  be  taxed  Four  Pence  in  a  hun- 
dred  Pounds^  fays  he,  //  might  for  the  fame  Reafon, 

and 

*  One  of  our  n^jeekly  Adverraries  fmartly  retorts  upon  me, 
in  thefe  Words  :  **  Would  not  he  think  it  a  Hardlhip,  and 
**  a  mighty  one  too,  to  be  obliged  to  pay  one  Farthing  in  % 
**  hundred  Pounds,  to  the  Support  of  any  other  religious 
**  Denomination  in  the  World?'*  (Am.  Whigy  Numb.  XXI.) 
I  anfwer.  No,  I  fhould  not  think  it  a  Hardfhip  to  be  obliged 
to  contribute  fuch  a  Trifle,  for  the  Support  even  of  Maho- 
metifm  ;  in  Cafe  I  lived  in  a  Mahometan  Country,  and 
were  indulged  with  the  Ut^  and  full  Enjoyment  of  my  own 
Religion,  at  the  fame  Time, 


DEFENDED.  251 

md  v)ith  AS  much  Juftice^  if  it  was  thought  the  Sect. 
Support  of  Bifhops  called  for -it ^  be  taxed  Four  Shil- 
lings^ or  Four  Pounds  in  the  Hundred^  and  fo  on  to 
^en  Founds^  until  the  "Tax  of  'Tythes  was  ccmpleatly 
faflened  on  us^  p.  194.  To  fay  nothing  of  the  ab- 
furd  Notion,  that  we  may  with  as  much  Jullice,  or 
with  as  little  Injuftice,  tranfgrefs  the  Rules  of  E- 
quity  greatly  and  notorioufly,  as  in  a  fmall  Degree  •, 
v/hich  is  equivalent  with  this,  that  a  Man  that  has 
aberrated  100  Miles  from  his  proper  Road,  is  not 
farther  out  of  his  Way,  than  he  that  has  deviated 
07ie  Mile  :  The  fame  Argument  will  equally  con- 
clude againft  every  Degree  of  civil  Authority. 
Thus,  for  Inftance,  if  a  Country  may  be  taxed 
Four  Pence  in  a  hundred  Pounds,  it  may,  for 
the  fame  Reafon,  and  with  as  'much  Juflice^  if  it 
was  thought  that  the  Support  of  Government 
called  for  it,  be  taxed  Four  Shillings,  or  Four 
Pounds  in  the  Hundred,  and  fo  on  to  the  whole. 
Again,  if  a  Man's  perfonal  Services  may  be  juftly 
claimed  by  the  Public  for  one  Day  in  the  Year,  ' 
they  may  as  jufily  be  claimed  for  a  Week,  a 
Month,  or  even  the  whole  Year.  Any  Man  that 
fhould  reafon  at  this  Rate,  and  ad  according  to 
the  Tenor  of  fuch  reafoning,  I  fancy,  would  not 
be  efteemed  a  good  Subjed  or  Member  of  Soci- 
ety, in  any  State  or  Kingdom  on  the  Face  of  the 
Globe.  And  yet,  this  Kind  of  reafoning  the  Dodor 
teaches  ! 

The  next  Subje6l  of  his  Animiadverfion,  is  the 
Anfwer  given  in  the  Appeal  to  the  Objeftion  or 
Sufpicion,  that  probably  the  Power  of  American 
Bifhops  may  be  hereafter  augmented.  But  v/hat 
was  then  faid,  I  conceive,  remains  in  full  Force, 

K  k  2  notv/ith- 


252  THE    APPEAL 

Sect,  notvvithfbanding  the  Dodor's  Attempts  to  weaken 
^^*  it*.  If  he  has  faid  any  Thing  upon  the  Subjed 
which  is  worthy  of  Notice,  it  has  been  abundantly 
anfwered,  in  the  different  Parts  of  this  Defence, 
which  I  need  not  repeat.  Nay,  much  more  that 
was  faid  upon  the  Subject  by  Dr.  Mayhew,  who 
pufhed  the  Objedion  to  Extremity,  has  been  fully 
anfwered  by  Mr.  Apthorp  •,  and,  I  may  add,  was 
powerfully  anfwered  and  confuted  by  himfelf,  in 
Words  quoted  incautioufiy  by  the  Doftor,  in  p.  174^ 
It  is  readily  owned,  fays  Dr.  Mayhew,  that  our 
Apprehenfion  of  v/hat  may  poffibly  or  probably 
be  the  Confequence  of  Bifiiops  being  fent  hither, 
ought  not  to  put  us  on  infringing  the  religious 
Liberty  of  our  Feliow-Subjeds,  and  Chriftian 
**  Brethren." 

To  fhew  that  Americans  need  not  be  frightened 
with  the  Imagination  that  our  Bifhops  may  in  Time 

be 

*  The  American  Whig  has  given  himfelf  very  triumphant 
Airs,  in  his  Attack  upon  the  Pafiage  under  our  prefent  Re- 
view. **  However,"  as  is  remarked  by  one  of  my  Friends, 
*'  he  does  not  ofrer  a  Syllable  that  will  invalidate  the  Infe- 
**  rence.  He  rings  the  Changes  on  the  Words  probable  and 
*•*  p^ffi^l^^  ^i^i  ^^  becomes  moft  tedious,  difgufting  and  unin- 
*•  teiligible.  He  infmuates  that  Dr.  C.  in  his  Anfwer  to  the 
**  Objedion,  fubilituted  the  Word  pojjible,  in  the  Place  of 
*^  probable i  to  evade  the  Force  of  the  Argument.  But  every 
^*  Perfon  of  the  leaft  Difcernment,  moft  perceive  that  the 
**  Doftor,  when  he  ufcd  the  Word  probable,  put  it  in  the 
**  Mouth  of  the  fuppofed  Objeftor  :  When  he  ufed  the  Word 
"  p^J^^'-^^i  ^^  fpeaks  in  his  own  Name.  The  illEfFedls  which  are 
*'  fuppofed  in  the  Objeftion  to  be  probable,  he  denies  to  be 
**  fuch,  but  barely  pojjlble  only  ;  and  juftly  obferves  from 
**  thence,  that  if  e^very  pojfibk  ill  Effe£i  cf  a  Thing,  although 
**  confeJ[edly  proper  in  it/elf  and  harmlefs  in  its  natural  Tendency y 
*'  may  he  made  an  Argument  cgainfi  it,  there  is  nothing  that  can 
*'  efcape. — Evidently,  there  is  in  this  no  Sophijlry,  no  Arti- 
**  Jice,  with  which  the  Whig  very  decently  charges  him.'* 
Whip  for  the  ^;w.  Whig,  No.  XXXI. 


DEFENDED.  253 

be  inveflcd  with   civil    Authority,  I  explained  in  Sect. 
what  Manner  it  would  probably  operate,  on  Sup- 
poftticn  that  the  Cafe  fliould  adually  happen.    My 
Vv^ords   are  thefe  :  '  But  fhould  the  Government 

*  fee  fit  hereafter  to  invefh  them  with  fome  Degree 

*  of   civil  Power,    worthy   of   their   Acceptance, 

*  which  it  is  impofTible  to  fay  they  will  not,  al- 

*  though  there  is  no  Appearance  that  they  ever 

*  will  •,  yet  as  no  new  Powers  will   be  created  in 

*  Favor  of  Bifhops,   it  is  inconceivable  that  any 

*  would  thereby  be  injured/  The  Dodor  fays, 
this  has  unwarily  opened  the  Workings  of  my  own 
Heart.  And  in  p.  202,  he  goes  farther  and  fays, 
that  I  fuppofe^  i.  e.  believe  (as  his  life  of  the  Word 
neceffarily  implies)  that  the  American  Bifliops  will 
be  invefted  with  civil  Authority ;  but  with  what 
Jufbice,  is  fubmitted  to  the  Reader.  Is  fuch  a  Be-  ' 
lief  deducible  from  my  having  made  the  Suppofi- 
tion  "^  Things  confefledly  improbable,  and  even 
impofTible,  are  frequently  fuppofed^  for  the  Ufe  of 
Illuftration.  Is  it  infered  from  my  declaring  it  to 
be  '  impoHible  to  fay,  that  Bifhops  will  not  be  in- 

*  veiled  with  civil  Authority  ?'  I  can  alfo  truly  de- 
clare, that  it  is  impofTible  to  fay  that  Dr.  Chauncy 
will  not  be  made  an  American  Bifhop  \  but  it  would 
be  unjuil  to  infer  from  thence,  that  I  believed  fo 
extraordinary  a  Thing  would  happen  ^  efpecially 
if  I  fhould  add,  as  I  did  in  the  other  Cafe,  that 
'  there  is  no  Apearance  that  he  ever  will.* 

In  p.  196,  the  Do6lor  turns  afide  to  fhew,  that 
the  Minifters  of  Chrift's  Kingdom,  which  is  not  of 
this  World,  fhould  not  concern  themfelves  with 
temporal  Matters  •,  and  he  quotes  St.  Paul,  to  fup- 
port  his  Opinion.  But  how  far  he  means  to  carry 
the  Do<Strine,  whether  as  far  as  it  was  carried  by 

the 


THE    APPEAL 

the  Frairtcelli^  or  the  Difciples  of  Herman  Pongilup^ 
in  the  13th  Century,  he  does  not  fay. -,  but  he  evi- 
dently carries  it  much  farther  than  the  venerable 
Doctors  Increafe  and  Cotton  Mather  and  Dr.  Cole- 
man^ v/hofe  Opinion  we  have  feen.  As  it  is  not  my 
Bufmefs  to  enter  into  a  Difcuffion  of  this  Subject, 
which  has  no  Relation  to  that  of  American  Bi- 
fhops,  I  Hiall  pafs  it  by  \  thanking  the  Doctor  for 
recomending  to  me  good  old  Biiliop  Latimer's 
Sermon  of  ike  Plough ;  and  promifmg  him  to  read 
it  carefully,  if  he  will  be  fo  kind  as  to  direct  me 
vvhere  I  can  meet  with  it  •,  if  perchance  he  himfelf 
hath  met  with  any  more  of  it  than  is  quoted  by  Mr, 
Peirce. 

The  Doctor  now,  drawing  towards  a  Conclufi- 
on,  looks  back  upon  his  Performance,  and  feems 
to  be  mightily  fatisfied  with  v/hat  he  has  been  do- 
ing. I  tear  I  have  fomewhat  broken  in  upon  his 
Repofe  j  the  Apprehenfion  of  which,  I  affure  him, 
gives  me  no  Pleafure.  If  I  could  have  done  Juf-. 
tice  to  the  Caufe  I  have  undertaken  to  plead, 
without  difturbing  him,  I  would  mofl  willingly 
have  avoided  it.  1  have  a  Veneration  for  his  Years, 
and  much  Refpect  for  his  Character,  which  I  am 
forry  he  has  expofed  by  engaging  in  fo  wretched  a 
Caufe.  He  has  written  with  Reputation  on  other 
Subjects,  but  he  is  manifeftly  unequal  to  the  Diffi- 
culties he  had  to  encounter  with  on  this.  And  in- 
deed, where  is  the  Man  that  is  equal  to  fuch  a 
Tafk  ?  Who  is  able  to  prove,  that  good  is  evil, 
and  evil  good — that  Darknefs  is  Light,  and  Light 
Darknefs— as  well  as  to  call  them  fo  ?  Until  a  Per- 
fon  of  fuch  a  Genius  and  Abilities  can  be  found,  it 
never  can  be  proved,  that  it  is  not  cruel  and  un- 
righteous to  oppofe  our  shaving  fuch  an  EpifcQ- 

pate. 


DEFENDED.  25 

pate,    as   is  requefted    for  the   Church  in    Ame-   Sect 
rica.  ^^- 

« 

The  Doctor  has  a  few  other  Things  to  fay,  of 
which  fome  Notice  muil:  be  taken.  I  had  inilfted 
that  Reafons  of  Pohcy  demanded  from  our  Supe- 
ors  and  Governors  at  Home,  peculiar  Attention  to 
the  Complaints  of  Epifcopalians  in  the  Colonies  : 
Becaufe  '  the  Church  of  England  here  is  infepara- 

*  bly  connected  with  the  Church  at  Home,  or  ra- 
'  ther,  is  elTentially  the  fame  with  it'--and  becaufe  this 
Church  '  in  its  external  Polity,  is  fo  happily  con- 
'  nected  and  interwoven  with  the  civil  Conflituti- 

*  on,  that  each  mutually  f  jpports  and  is  fupported 
'  by  the  other ;  no  Form  of  ecclefiaflical  Govern- 
'  ment  fo  exactly  harmonizing  with  a  mixed  Mo- 
'  narchy,  as  that  of  a  qualified  Epifcopacy.'    The 
Doctor  anfwers,  that  according  to  my  own   Ac- 
count of  Bifhops,  they  are  abfoluie  Monai'ch?  in  the 
Church  ',  and  ftich  mufi  Kings  be  in  the  State  to  make 
cut  a  proper  Analogy,  p.  198  •,  and  much  has  been 
offered  to  the  fame  Purpofe  by  one  of  my  weekly 
Antagonills.     But  to  all  that  they  have  faid,  it  is  a 
fufncient  Reply,  that  according  to  the  Reprefenta- 
tion  of  the  Appeal^  Bifhops    are  invefred  with  an 
Authority  for  which  they  acknowledge  themfelves 
to  be  accountable, — an  Authority  limited  and  re- 
gulated by  fixed  Laws,  which  is  incompatible  with 
the  Idea  of  an  abfolute  Monarch  ;  who  knows  no 
other  Law  than  his  own  arbitrary  Pleafure*.  The 
true  Parallel   between  ecclefiaflical  and  civil  Go- 
vernment, as  I  concieve,  runs  thus :    Independency 
anfwers  to  Democracy— Frejhytcrianifm^  to  an  Arif- 
tocracy — primitive,  or  proteftant   Epifcopacy^  to   a 
mixed  Monarchy — and  Popery,  to  an  abfolute  Mo- 
narchy. 

*  Spirit  of  Laws^  Bock  II. 


3^56  T  H  E    A  P  P  E  A  L 

Sect,  narchy.  From  hence  it  follows,  that  in  the  View  of 
•  meer  Policy,  it  is  abfurd  to  encoux-age  epifcopal  Go- 
vernment in  Republicks  and  democraticai  States ; 
and  as  much  i:o,  to  prefer  Prefbyterianifm  or  Inde- 
pendency, where  the  civil  Government  is  reo-al  or 
monarchical.  ^   ' 

The  Doctor  is  pleafed  to  fay,  p.  199,  in  the 
tnie  Spirit  of  Contradiction,  what  I  believe  has 
never  been  faid  by  any  before  him,  that  the  Go- 
vernment of  the  Church,  by  fuch  Bifhops  as  I  had 
defcnbed,  is  more  unlike  the  Government  of  the 
State,  by  Kings,  Lords,  and  Commons,  than  any  Form 
of  Government  of  the  Church  that  was  ever  hmvn 
in  the  Colonies  ;  and  perhaps,  is  more  naturally  and 
powerfully  adapted  to  subvert  it.  But  whither 
will  thefe  extraordinary  Flights  at  laft  carry  him  > 
He  forgets  that  he  fet  out  upon  the  contrary  Prin- 
ciple, m  the  Beginning  of  his  Book  ;  lloutly  con- 
tending that  Epifcopacy  was  eftablilhed  at  the 
Time  of  the  Reformation,  not  upon  the  Footing 
of  a  divine  Inftitution,  but  upon  Account  of  its 
being  beft  fitted  to  the  Form  of  Government  in  the 
State.  The  civil  Conftitution  of  the  Britilh  Mo- 
narchy is,  in  all  elTential  Points,  the  fame  now 
that  it  was  at  that  Period,  and  Epifcopacy  is  the 
tame  ;  fo  that  if  they  were  peculiarly  adapted  to 
each  other  then,  they  are  now.     That  this  was, 

T^  i^'v^r^  ^^^^'  ^  ^"^^^^  ^^^^^^^  '  ^"d  Reafons  for 
this  Belief  were  given  in  t\iQ  Appeal-,  which  Rea- 
lons  the  Doctor  has  not  attempted  to  invalidate. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  fame  Opinion  has 
been  maintained,  by  the  greatell  and  befl  Writers 
iipon  the  Subject.     «  For  the  Government  of  Bi- 

*'  fhops/' 


DEFENDED.  S5; 

fhops,"  fays  the  incomparable  Lord  Baconfy  Sect, 
for  my  Part,  not  prejudging  the  Proceedings  of  ^^* 
other  Churches,  I  do  hold  it  to  be  warranted  by 
the  Word  of  God,  and  by  the  i'radice  of  the 
ancient  Church  in  better  Times,  and  much  mere 
convenient  for  Kingdoms,  than  a  Parity  of  Mi- 
nifters,  and  Government  by  Synods.'*  It  was  an 
Obfervation  of  the  noble  and  learned  Philip  de 
Mornay^  who  was  not  only  a  Calvinift,  but  a 
principal  Support  of  the  Protcilant  Religion  in 
France  •,  "  that  although  the  prefbyterian  Govern- 
*'  ment  might  do  v/ell  enough  in  popular  States, 
"  luch  as  Geneva  and  Switzerland,  yet  in  King- 
"  doms  or  Monarchies,  epifcopal  Government  is 
"  rather  to  be  chofen."     '  And  the  fame  Opinion 

*  in  much  flronger  Terms,  and  with  a  particular 

*  View  to  Englard^  was  profeflcd  by  another  Fo- 
'  reigner,  who  underftood  Politicks  as  well  as  molt 

*  Men  of  his  Tim,e,  and  was  both  a  good  Pro- 

*  teftant  and  had  great  Candor  in  Matters  of  Re- 

*  ligion  ;  I  mean   the   celebrated  Pujfendorf  who 

*  expreffes  himfelf  in  the  following  Words :  "  In 
"  this  Refpe6i:  Kkewife  not  a  little  Blemijli  is 
"  thought  to  lie  upon  many  of  the  Calvinifts,  as 
*'  being  too  much  mclined  to  affc6t  Democracies, 
*'  and  being  on  the  contrary  averfe  to  Monarchies, 
^'  and  forward  to  fuhvert  them."—'  Whm  Puff  en- 
«  ^cr/fays  that  the  Calvinifts  are  too  much  inclined 

*  to  Democracies,  he  is  not  to  be  underftood  as  if 

*  he  reprefented  all  of  that  Sed  as  being  at  all 
'  Times  thus  difpofed  ;  for  no  doubt,  while  the 
«  Kings  under  w^hom  they  live  encourage  and  favor 

*  them,  they  rgay  fo  long  be  well  enough  plealed 

*  with  their  Government,  and  willing  to  lupporc 
^  it.  The  Baron's  Meaning  I  take  to  have  been, 

LI  t  that 

-f-  As  quoted  by  Blfhop  Ellys. 


THE    APPEAL 

^  that  the  popular  Forms  of  their  Church-Govern-- 
'  ment,  have  a  natural  Tendency  to  raife  Difpofi- 
'  tions,  which,  when  either  they  are  foured  by  un- 

*  favorable  Treatment,    or  not  enough  fweetned 

*  by  perfonal  Intereft  under  Monarchies,  are  apt 

*  to  lean  much  towards  popular  Schemes*.'  I 
might  quote  innumerable  Authorities  to  the  fame 
Purpofc  i  but  I  will  content  myfelf  with  one  more. 
*'  The  eftablifhed  Religion,  and  the  eftablifhedGo- 
"  vernment,"  fays  a  Writer  of  great  Candor  and 
Penetration,  "  are  in  their  Conflitution  and  Inter- 
*'  efts  fo  interwoven  and  linked  together,  that  they 

who  would  ftibvert  the  Government,  have  no 
furer  Way  to  compafs  their  wicked  Ends,  than 
by  endeavouring  to  ruin  the  Church  firft.  The 
greateft  Strength  of  the  Government  ever  did 
and  ever  will  lie  in  the  Fidelity  and  Affedion  of 
"  the  Members  of  the  eftablifhed  Church  :  As  the 
*'  Government  knows  this  to  be  true,  fo  do  its 
EnemieSy  who  therefore  are  as  ready  by  all  Ar- 
tifices and  Attempts  to  weaken  it,  as  our  Go- 
vernors can  be  to  favor  and  proted  itf  .'* 


WE  are  neither  fo  void  of  Difcerjiment^  fays  the 
Dodor,  or  unacquainted  with  the  Intrigues  of  thofe 
who  are  moft  zealous  for  an  American  Epifcopate^  as 
not  to  be  fully  fatisfied^  they  have  much  more  in  De^ 
fign  than  they  have  been  pleafed  openly  to  declare^  p. 
201.  But  notwithftanding  his  Opinion  of  his  own 
Difcernmenty  he  ftiould  remember  that  this  Charge 
brought  againft  us  before  '  the  Tribunal  of  the 
*  Public,'  ought  to  be  fupported,  at  leaft,  with  an 
Appearance  of  Evidence.  It  is  no  fmall  Thing  pub- 
lickly  to  accufe  pf  Prevarication  and  Fallhood, 

fuch 


*  Elyls  TraSlsy  p.  I48.- 

t  Hare's  Works,  Vol.  I.  p.  532. 


DEFENDED.  259 

llich  a  Number  of  Men,  who  have  always  been  Sect. 
refpeded  for  their  Integrity  ;  and  fomething  more  ^^* 
than  arbitrary  Sufpicions  will  be  needful,  to  juflify 
fo  high  an  Impeachment.  But  he  tells  us,  he  is 
not  unacquainted  with  their  Intrigues.  Let  him  then, 
for  the  Sake  of  his  own  Reputation,  difcover  them 
to  the  World.  This  is  what  he  owes  both  to  the 
Public  and  himfelf -,  and  it  is  expeded  from  him, 
as  he  would  not  betray  the  Caufe,  for  which  he 
profelTes  to  be  uncommonly  zealous.  Let  him 
mention  fome  one  Intrigue.,  fome  over-A6l,  from 
which  it  can  reafonably  be  concluded,  that  our 
Defigns  are  contrary  to  our  Declarations,  and  we 
will  take  Shame  to  ourfelves ',  but  if  he  can  offer 
no  other  Proof  than  his  pretended  Difcernment  of 
our  fecret  Intentions,  he  will  be  confidered  as  no 
better  than  a  falfe  Accufer  of  his  Chriitiun  Bre- 
thren, who  have  given  him  no  juft  Caufe  of  Pro- 
vocation.  This  Matter  is  of  fo  great  Confequence 
in  the  prefent  Debate,  that  we  cannot  give  it  up, 
but  m.ufl  infift  that  he  comes  to  a  particular  Expla- 
nation. Much,  very  much,  depends  upon  it.  The 
Uproar  about  Bifhops  has  been,  in  a  great  Mea- 
fure,  excited  and  continued  by  this  very  Pretence. 
If  we  are  gtiilty  of  what  he  charges  us  with,  we 
deferve  to  be  oppofed  •,  if  we  are  innocent,,  we  ought 
to  be  acquitted.  I  therefore  call  upon  him  in  a  pub- 
lic Manner  to  produce  his  Evidence,  or  to  retrad 
his  Charge. 

7'HEIR  ultimate  Views.,  fays  he,  whatever  they 
fropofe  to  begin  with.,  have  not  been  fo  perfetily  je- 
a-eted  in  their  own  Breafts.,  but  that  they  have  been 
whifpered  about  from  one  Friend  to  another.,  fo  that 
we  are  at  no  Lofs  to  form  a  true  Judgment  of  them. 
And  agam  :  nings  have  tranfpired  from  thofe.,  who 

L  1  2  did.- 


THE    APPEAL 

did  not  know  how^  or  were  not  able  to  keep  a  Secret^ 
p  202.  I  once  more  affirm,  that  we  have  no  other 
Views  than  v/hat  we  have  publifned  •,  and  I  defy 
any  of  our  Adverfaries  to  prove  the  contrary.  I 
can,  at  leaft,  anfv/erfor  myfelf-,  I  can  anfwer  alfo 
for  our  Convention,  with  whofe  Views  and  Inten- 
tions it  will  be  allowed  that  I  am  acquainted — 
that  we  have  no  Secret  in  the  Gafe  •,  that  we  have 
no  ultimate  Views  that  are  contrary  to  our  immediate 
ones  •,  and  that  thefe  are  not  contrary  to  our  pub- 
lic Declarations.  But  to  anfwer  to  fuch  an  inde- 
finite Charge  of  private  V/hifpers^  by  no  Body 
knows  whom  or  when^  about  no  Body  knows  what ; 
is  more  than  I  will  undertake,  as  I  am  confcious 
of  my  Want  of  the  neceffary  Difcernraent.  And 
if  the  Do6lor  has  no  other  Evidence,  it  is  mxer 
trifling  with  the  Attention  of  the  Public,  to  infift 
xipon  this.  It  concerns  him  to  fhew  that  fome 
Difcovery  has  been  made,  either  with  or  without 
Defign,  by  fome  Perfon  who  may  be  fuppofed  to 
be  acquainted  with  all  Stcrets  of  the  Kind,  that  the 
Clergy  have  been  a6ting  a  deceitful,  double  Part 
with  the  World,  and  are  aiming  at  a  different 
Epifcopate  from  that  of  the  Appeal.  This  is  the 
grand  Point  ♦,  and  upon  his  Proof  of  it,  I  will 
venture  to  rifque  the  whole  Controverfy. 

I  HAVE  now  dene  with  Dr.  Chauncy  for  the  pre- 
fent,  having  replied  to  every  Thing  material  in  his 
Performance,  whether  it  relates  immediately  to  the 
propofed  Epifcopate,  to  the  C  hurch  of  England, 
or  to  the  Appeal ;  excepting  what  he  has  faid  upon 
the  general  Subje6b  of  Epifcopacy  :— And  even  to 
fome  Things  that  are  not  material,  any  farther 
than  as  they  are  thought  fo  by  fome  ignorant,  pre- 
judiced Perfons.    I  have  paffed  over  nothing,  from 

any 


DEFENDED.  261 

any  Opinion  of  Difficulty  in  replying  to  it;  and  I  Sect. 
have  endeavored  to  obviate  all  the  Objedlions  ot  o-  ^* 
thers,  in  anfwering  the  Dodlor's.  Different  Lan- 
guage from  his  has  been  frequently  ufed  in  the  late 
periodical  Exhibitions  againft  the  Church  •,  but 
the  Objections  have  been  much  the  fame ;  and  I 
am  miilaken,  if  I  have  not  done  Juftice  to  the  Ar- 
guments and  Reprefentations  of  thofe  Writers,  as 
well  as  to  his. 

There  is  indeed  one  Objeflion  flarted  by  them,' 
which  has  not  yet  been  confidered  -,  and  I  hardly 
know,  whether  it  is  worth  confidering.  The  Ob- 
jection is,  that  fuch  an  Epifcopate  as  is  propofed 
for  the  Colonies,  is  an  impojjible  Thing  in  its  own 
Nature.  The  Impojfihility  of  the  Thing  is  reprefen- 
ted  by  one  Writer,  to  be  fo  glaringly  evident,  that 
it  is  utterly  incredible  that  they  (the  Qltvgy)  Jloould  be 
fo  exceffvely  ignorant^  as  not  to  know  it*.  It  is  a 
fuiiicient  Anfwer  to  this  Obje6lion,  fuppofing  it  to 
have  been  made  ferioufly,  that  thofe  eminent  Per- 
fons  who  firft  projected  the  Plan,  and  thofe  who 
have  from  Time  to  Time  been  its  Patrons — many 
of  whom  were  much  better  acquainted  with  the 
Conftitution  of  the  Kingdom  and  its  Colonies  than 
thefe  Obje6lors — could  fee  no  Impofiibility  or  Dif- 
ficulty in  the  Matter.  Nay,  as  to  the  Impojfibility  of 
the  Things  Dr.  Chaiincy  himfelf,  who,  m  the  Ame* 
rican  IVhig's  Opinion,  is  one  of  the  mcft  learned  and 
able  Writers  in  America^,  was,  about  a  Year  ago, 
fo  excejfive  ignorant  as  not  to  know  it.  For  it  is  ut- 
terly incredible.,  that,  if  he  had  known  or  fufpeCled 
the  Impojfibility  that  fuch  a  Plan  could  be  executed, 
he  would  not  have  availed  himfelf  of  fo  capital  an 

Objedion. 

*  American  Whig^  Numb.  IV. 

t  See  Numb.  LU.  ,.^ 


262  THEAPPEAL 

Sect.  ObjctSlIon.  To  this  may  be  added :  It  is  a  good 
^^'  Evidence  that  the  propofed  Epifcopote  may  exift  in 
America,  that  fuch  an  Epifcopate  has  adually  exift- 
ed,  and  does  now  exift,  in  America,  among  the 
Moravians  •,  and  if  it  may  in  one  Church,  why  not 
in  another  ?  It  has  been  faid  that  the  Church  of 
England  is  an  Exception,  becaufe  its  Billiops  by 
the  Law  of  the  Land^  are  intitled  to  certain  Powers 
and  Preheminences  wherever  they  are  fettled  in  the 
Britifh  Dominions  ;  v/hich  Powers  are  difclaimed 
in  the  Plan.  The  Law  of  the  Land  in  this  Objedi- 
on,  I  fuppofe,  means  the  Laws  of  England,  and 
not  any  Laws  peculiar  to  this  Country  •,  and  if  by 
the  Laws  of  England  Bifliops,  contrary  to  the 
clear  Opinion  of  Dr.  Blackftone,  will  be  invefted 
with  fuch  Powers  and  Preheminences  in  America, 
as  foon  as  they  fhall  be  fent  hither  -,  it  muft  be 
owing  to  this  only  Reafon — that  the  Lav/s  of  Eng- 
land eftablilh  the  Church  throughout  the  Britifh 
American  Colonies,  in  the  fame  Manner  that  it  is 
eftablifhed  in  England.  But  will  the  Objedors  ad- 
mit of  this  Dodrine  ?  Have  not  the  ableft  Writers 
of  their  Party,  always  infifted  upon  the  contrary  ? 
Does  not  this  Dodrine  necefTarily  imply,  that  we 
have,  beiides  an  equitable,  a  legale  Right  to  an 
Epifcopate  ;  and  that  our  Oppofers  tranfgrefs  the 
Law  of  the  Land^  as  well  as  the  Lav/s  of  Equity  } 
But  flill,  an  Eftablilhment  in  Favor  of  the  Church 
here,  which  they  infinuate  in  this  Controverfy  that 
we  have,  but  which  they  mean  not  to  allow  on  any 
other  Occafion,  would  by  no  Means  exclude  an 
Epifcopate  in  the  very  Form  that  is  fpecified ;  for 
fuch  an  Epifcopate,  I  believe,  may,  at  any  Time, 
be  ereded,  or  rather,  reftored,  in  England.  It 
was  fhewn  in  the  Appeal^  that  the  Bifhops  pro- 
pofed for  America,  were  firft  mentioned  by  the 

Title 


DEFENDED.  263 

Title  of  Suffragans  ;  and  thofe  who  are  acquainted  Sect. 
with  the  Hiftory  of  the  Church,  and  the  ecclefi-  ^^' 
aflical  Laws  of  England,  know,  that  the  Bifhops 
marked  out  in  our  Plan,  whatever  they  may  be 
called,  are  in  Reality  no  other  than  Suffragans.  If 
therefore  the  Laws  of  England  admit  of  Suffra- 
gans, which  they  as  certainly  do,  as  of  Diocefan 
Bifhops,  they  then  admit  of  fuch  an  Epifcopate  as 
we  contend  for-,  even  were  we  to  fuppofe  the 
Church  of  England  to  be  as  fully  eftabiifhed  in 
the  Colonies  as  it  is  in  England,  and  by  the  fame 
Laws.  Suffragans  have  been  frequently  appointed 
at  Home,  under  the  prefent  ecclefiaflical  Eftablifh- 
ment  •,  and  the  Confequence  is  unavoidable,  that 
they  may  be  appointed  here.  But  after  all,  were 
the  Cafe  in  every  Refpe6l  as  the  Objedion  repre- 
fents  it  to  be,  which  it  is  not  in  any  Refpe6l  •,  yet 
an  A61  of  Parliament  would  make  our  Plan  prac- 
ticable ;  and  there  can  be  no  Doubt  but  its  Friends 
have  Intereft  enough  to  obtain  fuch  an  A61,  ihould 
they  find  it  to  be  neceffary. 


S  E  C  T, 


264 


I'he    Conclusion. 


THE  Reader  is  now  acquainted  with  both 
Sides  of  this  Controverfy.  An  Epifcopate 
is  requefled,  in  Behalf  ot  the  Church  of  England 
in  America.  The  Reafons  for  which  it  is  delired, 
have  been  offered  in  the  Appeal.  The  Nature  of 
the  propofed  Epifcopate,  has  alfo  been  explained. 
Difiatisfied  Perlbns  were  candidly  invited  to  pro- 
pofe  their  Obje6lions.  The  Adverfaries  of  the 
Church  have  had  Time  to  objedl  •,  and  a  fufiicient 
Number  of  Perfons  has  been  employed  in  this 
Service.  The  periodical  Objedlors  have  had  peri- 
odical Anfwers  -,  and  a  Reply  is  now  given  to  the 
more  formal  Obje6tions  of  Dr.  Chauncy, 

That  Obje6lions  would  arife  ag^ind  the  Settle- 
rrent  of  Bifhops  in  the  Colonies,  unlefs  they  Ihould 
be  under  peculiar  Regulations,  was  originally  fore- 
feen  \  and  therefore,  in  forming  the  Plan  for  an 
American  Epifopate,  all  poflible  Care  was  taken  to 
render  it  inoffenfive.  It  is  effential  to  this  Plan,  that 
the  Bifhops  intended,  are  to  have  no  Support  from 
the  Colonies,  except  by  voluntary  Donations  from 
private  Perfons  •,  and  that  they  are  to  exercife  no 
Jurifdidion,  but  over  the^Clergy  of  the  Church  of 
England  •,  by  which  Provifion,  the  great  popular 
Obje6lions  of  Tithes^  and  Spiritual  Courts^  have  no 
Foundation  to  reft  on.  This  is  fo  evident,  that  our 
Opponents  have  hazarded  but  very  little  upon  thofe 
Points ;  and  have  found  it  neceffary  to  introduce  a 
new  Set  of  Objections,  in  Order  to  keep  jup  the 
Oppofition  againft  the  Church,  being  unable  to 
defend  the  old  ones. 

They 


r.5^  CONCLUSION.  265 

They  now  objedl  that  we  do  not  really  dertre  to 
have  an  Epifcopate  under  fuch  a  Modification,  as 
is  propofed  to  the  Public.  This  is  a  very  material 
Objedion,  could  it  be  fupported  ;  and  deferves 
perhaps  more  Attention,  than  all  the  others  which 
they  are  able  to  offer.  But  important  as  it  is,  it  has 
nothiftg  more  folid  to  depend  upon  than  malevolenc 
Conjedure  ;  for  whatever  may  be  their  Pretences, 
every  Reader  knows  that  they  have  hitherto  in- 
tirely  failed  in  the  Article  of  Proof.  On  our  Side, 
the  flrongefl:  Evidence  that  the  Nature  of  fuch  a 
Cafe  will  admit  of,  has  been  laid  before  the  Public. 
We  have  produced  as  Witneffes  the  Society's  an- 
niverfary  Sermons,  their  Abftrads,  and  indeed  all 
that  has  peen  publifhed  on  the  Subjed  by  fuch  as 
could  be  fuppofed  to  underftand  the  Cafe,  for 
Half  a  Century  paft  •,  all  which,  without  one  Ex- 
ception, teftify  in  our  Favor.  We  have  added  our 
folemn  Declarations,  which  muft  have  a  Weight 
proportionable  to  what  is  allowed  to  our  Charadlers. 
The  Teftimony  of  our  Vouchers  is  clear  and  ex- 
prefs,  uniform  and  confident,  and  diredly  to  the 
Point  •,  while  not  one  counter  Evidence  has  appear- 
ed on  the  other  Side  to  weaken  it.  To  the  Weight 
of  our  Declarations  nothing  has  been  oppofed,  but 
ungenerous  Reflections  and  pretended  Sufpicions. 

Aeter  driving  the  preceding  Objection  as  far 
as  poflible,  it  has  been  farther  urged,  that  fuppo- 
fino-  fuch  an  harmlefs  Epifcopate  as  that  of  the 
A-pped  to  be  at  firfl  fettled,  yet  it  would  foon  de- 
generate into  one  that  is  opprefTive.  We  fee  not  the 
lead  Probability  of  this  -,  and  we  abfolutely  deny 
that  any  fitch  Thing  is  intended  :  So  far  from  it, 
that  the  Friends  of  the  Church  would  even  join 
wiih  its  Enemies,  were  that  necelTary,  in  guarding  a- 

M  m  '     gainft 


the   CONCLUSION. 

gainft  it.  All  the  Afiurances,  all  the  Evidences, 
all  the  Securities  wliich  we  have  in  our  Power  to 
give,  to  prevent  Uneafmefs,  we  are  willing  to  of- 
fer ♦,  and  all  that  is  not  beneath  the  Dignity  of  Go- 
vernment to  give,  Vv^e  are  willing  to  foilicit.  Wc 
y/ant  not  an  Epifcopate  on  the  Footing  of  a  State- 
Eftahlipjnent ;  we  defire  no  more  than  a  compieat 
Toleration,  which  we  have  not  at  prefent  •,  and 
thereby  to  be  raifed  to  an  Equality  with  other  re- 
ligious Denominations  in  the  Colonies.  To  this, 
we  think  ourfelves  Entitled,  upon  the  common 
Principles  of  religious  Liberty  and  of  the  Enghili 
Conflitution  •,  and  we  are  furprized  and  concerned, 
to  find  that  any  who  profefs  a  Regard  for  thofe 
Principles,  can  oppofe  our  Claim.  We  are  frill 
more  furprized  to  fee  the  Arts  to  which  they  can 
defcend,  in  fupporting  their  Oppofition.  From  Men 
of  Senfe  and  Candor,  reafonable  and  candid  Beha- 
viour is  naturally  expe6led.  From  Gentlemen  we 
expect,  at  leaf!:.  Decency ;  and  from  Chriftians, 
Charity.  0\\v  Opponents  make  high  Pretenfions 
to  Candor  and  good  Senfe,  and  call  themfelves 
Gentlemen  and  Chriftians ;  but  how  far  their  late 
Attacks  upon  the  Church  haye  been  reafpaable,  or 
candid,  or  decent,  or  charitable,  I  am  perhaps  too 
far  interefled,  fairly  to  determine.  The  Public 
have  been  invited  to  judge  of  this  Controverfy  ; 
and  to  their  impartial  Decifion  the  Manner,  as  well 
as  the  Matter  of  it,  is  mpft  refpedlfuliy  fubmitted. 

If  this  Difpiite  is  to  be  continued,  I  would 
humbly  propofe  a  new  Plan  of  Operations,  viz. 
That  the  Debate  be  reduced  within  a  narrower 
Compafs,  and  that  nothing  which  does  not  imme- 
diately relate  to  the  Merits  of  the  Caufe,  be  offer- 
ed on  either  Side.    We  have  already  trefpalled  toq 

far 


r/^^   C  O  N  C  L  U  S  I  O  N. 

■far  upon  the  Patience  of  the  Public  -,  let  us  be 
careful  hereafter  to  make  a  proper  Ufe  of  their 
Indulgence.  I  v/culd  alfo  propofe,  that  no  Invec- 
tive or  Abufe,  nothing  that  favors  of  Bigotiy  or 
Barbarity,  be  fuffered  to  mingle  in  the  Debate  •, 
but  that  ingenuous,  fober  Reafoning,  fnould  decide 
it.  It  ought  to  be  remembered,  that  we  are  not 
only  accountable  to  the  Public  for  our  Behavior  in 
this  Controvcrfy,  but  that  v/e  muil  one  Day  anfwer 
for  it  before  a  higher  Tribunal. 

This  lail  Confideration  had  fuch  an  Effect  upon 
Dr.  du  Moulin,  who,  it  feems,  had  been  an  ahufive 
controverfial  Writer,  that  when  he  came  to  lie  upon 
his  Death-Bed,  he  made  the  following  penitential 
Declaration  •,  which  may  deferve  our  peculiar  At- 
tention, while  we  are  engaged  in  the  prefent  Dil- 
pute  about  American  Bifhops.  "  As  for  my  Books, 
*'  fays  he,  in  which  I  mixed  many  perfonal  Reflec- 
"  tions,  I  am  now  fenfible  I  vented  too  much  of 
*'  my  own  Paffion  and  Bitternefs  •,  and  therefore  I 
''  difclaim  all  that  is  perfonal  in  them  ;  and  am 
*'  heartily  forry  for  every  Thing  I  have  written  to 
"  the  defaming  any  Perfon.  I  humbly  beg  God, 
"  and  all  thofe  I  have  v/ronged.  Pardon,  for  Jefus 
"  Chrift's  Sake,  and  am  refolved,  if  God  fpare  my 
"  Life,  never  to  meddle  more  with  fuch  perfonal 
^'  Things  :  And  do  earneftly  exhort  all  People,  as 
"  a  dying  Man,  that  they  will  ftudy  more  Love 
"  and  mutual  Forbearance  in  their  Differences; 
^'  and  will  avoid  all  bitter  and  uncharitable  Reflec- 
"  tions  on  one  another's  Perfons.  And  as  I  ear- 
"  neilly  pray  thofe  worthy  Men  of  the  Church  of 
"  England  to  have  Charity  and  Tendernefs  for 
"  the°Diffenters  from  them  -,  fo  I  beg  of  the  Dif- 
*'  fenters  that  they  would  have  a  due  Regard  and 

M  m  2  "  R  piped 


268  "The  CONCLUSION. 

"  Rcfpeft  to  thofe  of  the  Church  of  Englarid  i 
**  Of  many  of  whom  I  fay  now,  let  my  Soul  bfe 
with  theirs  !  And  that  all  true  Proteftants  among 
us  may  heartily  unite  and  concur  in  the  Defence 
and  Prefer vation  of  the  holy  reformed  Religion, 
now  by  the  Mercy  of  God  fettled  among  us. 
*'  And  that  Men  of  all  Sid^s  nlay^  according  to  St. 
^^  Paul's  Rule,  ceafe  to  hite  and  devour  one  another^ 
*'  left  we  he  deftroyed  one  of  another  \  and  that 
*'  whereunto  we  have  already  attained,  we  may 
*'  walk  by  the  fame  Rule  j  .  hoping  that  if  any 
*'  Man  is  otherwife  minded,  ia  fome  lelTer  Things, 
*'  God  lliall  either  reveal  that  i6  them,  or  merciful* 
"  ly  forgive  it,  through  Jefus  Chrift/* 


4C 


«( 


<C 


cc 


P    I    N    t   S. 


F-r 


«a- 


k 


rJ'''? 


Arltngtntt 

(Eljurrlf 

SItbrarg 

(gift  of 


.m^t. 


■v'iS:'  't^t 


V 


